Possible justification of playing 1. e3 as white

Sort:
ThrillerFan
Professor_Gobbles wrote:
ThrillerFan wrote:
PeJeon77 wrote:

Here is a possible justification of playing 1. e3 as white. In a specific scenario, if your opponent never plays 1. e4 as white and you have at least a pretty good understanding of 1. e4 1.e5 positions (and fine with a few transpositions to the QG or English as white), you could play this to throw your opponent off. Since your opponent wouldn't play e4 as white and if you have solid experience in e4 e5 positions I assume you could take advantage of this considering your theoretical opponent never plays e4 as white. If your opponent plays 1. d5 then you just achieve a normal position. It's also helpful if you are experienced in the Queens Gambit as white and want to have a possible opportunity to throw your opponent off their game with a reverse e4 e5 position. (There are also positions that can transpose into b3 positions with this opening and many top games have started with e3.) Thoughts?

 

 

Total garbage and hogwash!  You do not play an opening with the expectation of tricking the opponent.  Wrong way to learn chess.  People are smarter than you think!

 

1.e3 d5 2.d4, Black can play 2...c5 instead of 2...Nf6 to take advantage of White's slow play.  Also, after your 2...Nf6 3.c4, thank you for not developing your Bishop.  No pressure on the dark squares and no threat to trade off my good Bishop.

 

Also possible is 1...Nf6, which you do not account for, staying Flexible!

 

And then for anyone that plays 1.e4, They can play 1...e5! And after you 2.e4, THANK YOU for letting me go first with Black!  Now I have the slight advantage that you SHOULD have for having the White pieces!

 

The only positive thing I can say about 1.e3 is that it has not been refuted!  Other than that, 1.e3 is hot garbage!

sometimes it's better to read what others think rather than posting an uneducated guess

 

I do read what others think.  Sometimes they say something legitimate.  Facts though are facts.  You can try to schmooze it all you want.  The facts are, 1.e3 is hot garbage, and 1.e3 e5 2.e4 is a slight advantage for Black, and anything that is a slight advantage for Black by move 2 is by all means hot garbage!

 

Facts are facts!  You just don't like the fact that I am being blunt about it.  But if the truth hurts ...

Professor_Gobbles
ThrillerFan wrote:
Professor_Gobbles wrote:
ThrillerFan wrote:
PeJeon77 wrote:

Here is a possible justification of playing 1. e3 as white. In a specific scenario, if your opponent never plays 1. e4 as white and you have at least a pretty good understanding of 1. e4 1.e5 positions (and fine with a few transpositions to the QG or English as white), you could play this to throw your opponent off. Since your opponent wouldn't play e4 as white and if you have solid experience in e4 e5 positions I assume you could take advantage of this considering your theoretical opponent never plays e4 as white. If your opponent plays 1. d5 then you just achieve a normal position. It's also helpful if you are experienced in the Queens Gambit as white and want to have a possible opportunity to throw your opponent off their game with a reverse e4 e5 position. (There are also positions that can transpose into b3 positions with this opening and many top games have started with e3.) Thoughts?

 

 

Total garbage and hogwash!  You do not play an opening with the expectation of tricking the opponent.  Wrong way to learn chess.  People are smarter than you think!

 

1.e3 d5 2.d4, Black can play 2...c5 instead of 2...Nf6 to take advantage of White's slow play.  Also, after your 2...Nf6 3.c4, thank you for not developing your Bishop.  No pressure on the dark squares and no threat to trade off my good Bishop.

 

Also possible is 1...Nf6, which you do not account for, staying Flexible!

 

And then for anyone that plays 1.e4, They can play 1...e5! And after you 2.e4, THANK YOU for letting me go first with Black!  Now I have the slight advantage that you SHOULD have for having the White pieces!

 

The only positive thing I can say about 1.e3 is that it has not been refuted!  Other than that, 1.e3 is hot garbage!

sometimes it's better to read what others think rather than posting an uneducated guess

 

I do read what others think.  Sometimes they say something legitimate.  Facts though are facts.  You can try to schmooze it all you want.  The facts are, 1.e3 is hot garbage, and 1.e3 e5 2.e4 is a slight advantage for Black, and anything that is a slight advantage for Black by move 2 is by all means hot garbage!

 

Facts are facts!  You just don't like the fact that I am being blunt about it.  But if the truth hurts ...

Is the QGD garbage? Is the french Garbage? e3 can pretty much forcibly transpose into these systems. Just because it is "offbeat" doesn't mean it is bad by any standards. (If you had read the above posts, you would have found this out for yourself).

ThrillerFan
Professor_Gobbles wrote:
ThrillerFan wrote:
Professor_Gobbles wrote:
ThrillerFan wrote:
PeJeon77 wrote:

Here is a possible justification of playing 1. e3 as white. In a specific scenario, if your opponent never plays 1. e4 as white and you have at least a pretty good understanding of 1. e4 1.e5 positions (and fine with a few transpositions to the QG or English as white), you could play this to throw your opponent off. Since your opponent wouldn't play e4 as white and if you have solid experience in e4 e5 positions I assume you could take advantage of this considering your theoretical opponent never plays e4 as white. If your opponent plays 1. d5 then you just achieve a normal position. It's also helpful if you are experienced in the Queens Gambit as white and want to have a possible opportunity to throw your opponent off their game with a reverse e4 e5 position. (There are also positions that can transpose into b3 positions with this opening and many top games have started with e3.) Thoughts?

 

 

Total garbage and hogwash!  You do not play an opening with the expectation of tricking the opponent.  Wrong way to learn chess.  People are smarter than you think!

 

1.e3 d5 2.d4, Black can play 2...c5 instead of 2...Nf6 to take advantage of White's slow play.  Also, after your 2...Nf6 3.c4, thank you for not developing your Bishop.  No pressure on the dark squares and no threat to trade off my good Bishop.

 

Also possible is 1...Nf6, which you do not account for, staying Flexible!

 

And then for anyone that plays 1.e4, They can play 1...e5! And after you 2.e4, THANK YOU for letting me go first with Black!  Now I have the slight advantage that you SHOULD have for having the White pieces!

 

The only positive thing I can say about 1.e3 is that it has not been refuted!  Other than that, 1.e3 is hot garbage!

sometimes it's better to read what others think rather than posting an uneducated guess

 

I do read what others think.  Sometimes they say something legitimate.  Facts though are facts.  You can try to schmooze it all you want.  The facts are, 1.e3 is hot garbage, and 1.e3 e5 2.e4 is a slight advantage for Black, and anything that is a slight advantage for Black by move 2 is by all means hot garbage!

 

Facts are facts!  You just don't like the fact that I am being blunt about it.  But if the truth hurts ...

Is the QGD garbage? Is the french Garbage? e3 can pretty much forcibly transpose into these systems. Just because it is "offbeat" doesn't mean it is bad by any standards. (If you had read the above posts, you would have found this out for yourself).

 

I did read the above posts.  1.e3 is still hot garbage.

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 is a slight advantage for White.  That said, that is the best Black can do.  1...c5, 1...e5, 1...c6, 1...e6 all give White a slight edge BECAUSE he goes first!

 

So to play 1.e3 e5 2.d3 d5 3.d4 and arguing that 1.e3 is good because you are now playing the Black side of the French is a good thing is total hogwash.  Yes, I play 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 as Black all the time!  Thousands of games here, ICC, over the board, and correspondence.  Black has a slight disadvantage, but manageable.

 

For White to have the same disadvantage is total hogwash.  Black should NOT be better, even slightly, after 3 moves!  It is as simple as that!

dpnorman

Using 1. e3 to transpose to black openings is silly, but that doesn't make 1. e3 in general a bad move. It's just equal and you can make imbalances or whatever, and honestly maybe I should play it sometime soon for fun, preferably against lower-rated opp

blank0923

1.e3 is an interesting way to open as white, but will often transpose into some other openings. For instance, 1.e3 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.exd4 d5 transposes back into the Exchange French; 1.e3 e5 2.c4 would be some version of the English. 

But transposing into a double king's pawn opening for black doesn't make any sense (unless you want to play black that badly, but keep in mind your opponent might not necessarily be unfamiliar with 1.e4 as White)

Strategy_Rapid

I was contemplating this. But after testing random things in blitz, my rating crashed. I think the pawn on e3 is poison sadly, but it does allow people like nakamura to hide their strats and play things similar to a hippo as white for streams.

Professor_Gobbles
ThrillerFan wrote:
Professor_Gobbles wrote:
ThrillerFan wrote:
Professor_Gobbles wrote:
ThrillerFan wrote:
PeJeon77 wrote:

Here is a possible justification of playing 1. e3 as white. In a specific scenario, if your opponent never plays 1. e4 as white and you have at least a pretty good understanding of 1. e4 1.e5 positions (and fine with a few transpositions to the QG or English as white), you could play this to throw your opponent off. Since your opponent wouldn't play e4 as white and if you have solid experience in e4 e5 positions I assume you could take advantage of this considering your theoretical opponent never plays e4 as white. If your opponent plays 1. d5 then you just achieve a normal position. It's also helpful if you are experienced in the Queens Gambit as white and want to have a possible opportunity to throw your opponent off their game with a reverse e4 e5 position. (There are also positions that can transpose into b3 positions with this opening and many top games have started with e3.) Thoughts?

 

 

Total garbage and hogwash!  You do not play an opening with the expectation of tricking the opponent.  Wrong way to learn chess.  People are smarter than you think!

 

1.e3 d5 2.d4, Black can play 2...c5 instead of 2...Nf6 to take advantage of White's slow play.  Also, after your 2...Nf6 3.c4, thank you for not developing your Bishop.  No pressure on the dark squares and no threat to trade off my good Bishop.

 

Also possible is 1...Nf6, which you do not account for, staying Flexible!

 

And then for anyone that plays 1.e4, They can play 1...e5! And after you 2.e4, THANK YOU for letting me go first with Black!  Now I have the slight advantage that you SHOULD have for having the White pieces!

 

The only positive thing I can say about 1.e3 is that it has not been refuted!  Other than that, 1.e3 is hot garbage!

sometimes it's better to read what others think rather than posting an uneducated guess

 

I do read what others think.  Sometimes they say something legitimate.  Facts though are facts.  You can try to schmooze it all you want.  The facts are, 1.e3 is hot garbage, and 1.e3 e5 2.e4 is a slight advantage for Black, and anything that is a slight advantage for Black by move 2 is by all means hot garbage!

 

Facts are facts!  You just don't like the fact that I am being blunt about it.  But if the truth hurts ...

Is the QGD garbage? Is the french Garbage? e3 can pretty much forcibly transpose into these systems. Just because it is "offbeat" doesn't mean it is bad by any standards. (If you had read the above posts, you would have found this out for yourself).

 

I did read the above posts.  1.e3 is still hot garbage.

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 is a slight advantage for White.  That said, that is the best Black can do.  1...c5, 1...e5, 1...c6, 1...e6 all give White a slight edge BECAUSE he goes first!

 

So to play 1.e3 e5 2.d3 d5 3.d4 and arguing that 1.e3 is good because you are now playing the Black side of the French is a good thing is total hogwash.  Yes, I play 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 as Black all the time!  Thousands of games here, ICC, over the board, and correspondence.  Black has a slight disadvantage, but manageable.

 

For White to have the same disadvantage is total hogwash.  Black should NOT be better, even slightly, after 3 moves!  It is as simple as that!

well, you are right about white giving away their advantage. I don't recommend e3 and don't think it's the best choice for an opening, but calling it "hot garbage" is a pretty daring claim without any sort of analysis. 

MisterWindUpBird
dpnorman wrote:

Using 1. e3 to transpose to black openings is silly, but that doesn't make 1. e3 in general a bad move. It's just equal and you can make imbalances or whatever, and honestly maybe I should play it sometime soon for fun, preferably against lower-rated opp

As people noted, you can get that hippo like structure going on. I occasionally play stuff like this on the other site anonymously, just for a bit of fun. It's amazing to watch. People, not titled chess cyborgs, but people... will just smash their own attacks upon it often enough. It plays into the concept that EVERY move from the starting position is an error. Hazy memories from the 90's are the only confirmation I need that if both players take this approach it gets tired very fast, though. Although it's useful for practicing German pronunciation, you'd think it can't really be 'good' to cramp your own position so much, on purpose. 

technical_knockout

i love the hippo... it suits my counter-punchy style & i find it leads to interesting 'pure chess' games that immediately leave book.

that being said i'd far rather open with 1.b3 than 1.e3, although a reversed french doesn't sound horrible either & it would be especially 'ok' for newer players who struggle with attacks against their f2.

jamesstack
blank0923 wrote:

1.e3 is an interesting way to open as white, but will often transpose into some other openings. For instance, 1.e3 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.exd4 d5 transposes back into the Exchange French;

I think we can all expect a rant from thrillerfan after that comment. lol

MisterWindUpBird
Optimissed wrote:

You can just play 2. b3, since after 1. b3 you should probably play 2. e3.

'Z' ist fur zugzwang und zwischenzug...

technical_knockout

?

Professor_Gobbles
Optimissed wrote:

Thoughts? Yes, you can't play the Queen's Gambit as white after playing 1. e3. Your B needs to go to g5 or, occasionally, f4.

not necessarily, you can play e3 before developing your dark squared bishop in the QG

sndeww

transpositions

PeJeon77
PeJeon77 wrote:

Here is a possible justification of playing 1. e3 as white. In a specific scenario, if your opponent never plays 1. e4 as white and you have at least a pretty good understanding of 1. e4 1.e5 positions (and fine with a few transpositions to the QG or English as white), you could play this to throw your opponent off. Since your opponent wouldn't play e4 as white and if you have solid experience in e4 e5 positions I assume you could take advantage of this considering your theoretical opponent never plays e4 as white. If your opponent plays 1. d5 then you just achieve a normal position. It's also helpful if you are experienced in the Queens Gambit as white and want to have a possible opportunity to throw your opponent off their game with a reverse e4 e5 position. (There are also positions that can transpose into b3 positions with this opening and many top games have started with e3.) Thoughts?

 

Regarding the OP, I wanted to highlight a possible scenario probably in tournament where your opponent has never played e4 and you have a lot of knowledge on e4 e5 positions or like some detailed course. To play a reverse e4 e5 position is risky and I also think its kind of a one time trick if you are playing reverse systems. Of course, e3 is not an inherently bad opening and I think it is totally viable weapon if you play the correct lines.  I myself, am an e4 player so I wouldn't play this anyway but I just wanted to show a possible way to take your opponent out of their knowledge and show some ideas.

jamesstack

Are there really any tournament players who have never played an e4-e5 position? I find it hard to believe such a player exists...even at the lower levels.

darkunorthodox88
ThrillerFan wrote:
PeJeon77 wrote:

Here is a possible justification of playing 1. e3 as white. In a specific scenario, if your opponent never plays 1. e4 as white and you have at least a pretty good understanding of 1. e4 1.e5 positions (and fine with a few transpositions to the QG or English as white), you could play this to throw your opponent off. Since your opponent wouldn't play e4 as white and if you have solid experience in e4 e5 positions I assume you could take advantage of this considering your theoretical opponent never plays e4 as white. If your opponent plays 1. d5 then you just achieve a normal position. It's also helpful if you are experienced in the Queens Gambit as white and want to have a possible opportunity to throw your opponent off their game with a reverse e4 e5 position. (There are also positions that can transpose into b3 positions with this opening and many top games have started with e3.) Thoughts?

 

 

Total garbage and hogwash!  You do not play an opening with the expectation of tricking the opponent.  Wrong way to learn chess.  People are smarter than you think!

 

1.e3 d5 2.d4, Black can play 2...c5 instead of 2...Nf6 to take advantage of White's slow play.  Also, after your 2...Nf6 3.c4, thank you for not developing your Bishop.  No pressure on the dark squares and no threat to trade off my good Bishop.

 

Also possible is 1...Nf6, which you do not account for, staying Flexible!

 

And then for anyone that plays 1.e4, They can play 1...e5! And after you 2.e4, THANK YOU for letting me go first with Black!  Now I have the slight advantage that you SHOULD have for having the White pieces!

 

The only positive thing I can say about 1.e3 is that it has not been refuted!  Other than that, 1.e3 is hot garbage!

do you like being an overly opiniated class player?

sndeww

i mean, someone's gotta do it

the opening forums would be dull without thriller

archangel2k6

How about playing it as Bird's Opening move order? 1.e3 d5 2.f4 - it has the benefit of avoiding the heavily complicated From's Gambit (1.f4 e5). If 1.e3 e5 then 2.d5 is fine for a reversed French. Against any 1...etc aside from 1..g6 then 2.f4 followed if possible by b2-b3 - does this look like a system?

Sea_TurtIe

treat it like the neo-kia?