Realy a joke opening ?
Sort:
These opening will work in amateur play, but at higher levels it is just too much of a risk - all GMs will have studied this and probably have answers that lead to a white win.
cmon, its obvious that your opponent is just making fun of you (no offensement). i dont think this game or opening should be a subject worth discussing...
for people saying its playable, yes it maybe, but its not winnable.
Don't do this.
It is not much fun being on the side of minority in the discussion... however, unless someone can strongly pointout the drawback in this opening (an immediate winning combination against it), I don't think he/she has any right to write the kind of comments some of us have written above. If this opening does not put the player in loosing poistion then it all depends on how well the person plays the middle game and further. Once the opening is done with no harm, the whole point of an opening being good/bad/playable doesn't arise and that opening becomes as good as any other.
Does anyone have any comments to disprove this opening with solid evidences? If not, then please don't write against this opening with "preconceived notions" or based on what you have heard so far from "others". If you have evidences then please post those evidences to help the community and people with little chess knowledge (like me)...
This opening will make white attack with all his army thinking black is a sucker. black can defend quite easaly leaving white open for a counter attack.not recommended for novice players if black makes one wrong move he's in big trouble.but white can end up losing a lot of his pieces.
Aug 19, 2007
0
#26
i may acctually play this, after all its only recreation i may learn something,dont come to me with a big rating and expect it tho!!!!!
At first this opening seems rediculous, after looking at it for a while, it is not the worst opening. I understand the arguments for catching your opponent by surprise, but I think that there are so many better tested openings that make this opening unrealistic for serious play. I would try this opening in fun play though!
interesting!
Yea, i would like to submit youre game here, maybe we can learn something from that game
erik wrote: Hugh_T_Patterson wrote: What The #$*&! Hey man, either I have no sense of humor and don't get the joke or all those chess books I've carefully studied are completely wrong. I've been going over this opening to see if this is one of those "let's see how dumb the new guys are trick questions," and I don't see any benefit to it. Even some of the played out posibble scenarios seem to be plagued with wasted moves and material losses that make no sense. Am I missing something here? I mean, I'm not a great chess player by any means but I thought I has studied openings enough to tell a practical one from a looney tunes one. Some help a fellow out here. Jeeeeezz!
you are right. this is a lame opening and not worth talking about in my humble opinion. but some people play it either because they want to prove that they are THAT MUCH BETTER than you, or because they want to catch you being overzealous.
I agree with eric. I would only think a player would use this opening to prove that they are much better than you and can beat you with any opening.
Aug 20, 2007
0
#31
Absolutely. Well, if you're Fischer or Kasparov or Kramnik and you want to prove that you can beat an IM with it, i say go ahead. Apart from that, please refrain! You'll risk getting mated rather soon! Go for the more reliable and respectable openings, however "boring" they may look. Perhaps if you want something more exciting you can try the sicilian!
I'm sick of this. There is a great advantage in using this opening in play that reflects the skill level of most of the players present (including myself). We can look at it and tell that it has a weakness...that is why we don't bother to study it. My advice, if you wish to play this opening at a casual level, is to study it like crazy. The mere fact that you know so much more theory on this particular opening may give you an advantage, even if it is not "theoretically" sound. Frequently people who adhere to theoretical openings (including myself generally) can be thrown off guard and defeated by moves that grandmasters would see as clearly mistaken.
I've read a story...I can't remember where...about a guy who gave his opponent four moves before beginning the game (of course, without allowing his opponent to checkmate him). He won the game. Then, one of his opponents, wanting to try again, moved both knights out, then back into their place, and was successful this time around. (Sorry if someone knows the story that I am referring to and I butchered it). The point is, often you can gain an advantage even if you are in a lesser situation if you are more familiar with your situation.
Also, if it's an opponent that you've never played before, a move like that may cause him to percieve you as weak. It may cause him to become overly aggressive, catching him by surprise if you are strongs subsequently.
That being said, I haven't analyzed the position much:-D However, the moves where black was defeated thus far by demonstration are games where he made mistakes.
White can also play this opening with 1. f3 e5 2. Kf2. I have heard it called the Hammerschlag and obviously would be suicide in the master game, but in amateur chess, most attacks can be held off and it may cause black to abandon his chess morals.
vinodagnihotri wrote:
It is not much fun being on the side of minority in the discussion... however, unless someone can strongly pointout the drawback in this opening (an immediate winning combination against it), I don't think he/she has any right to write the kind of comments some of us have written above. If this opening does not put the player in loosing poistion then it all depends on how well the person plays the middle game and further. Once the opening is done with no harm, the whole point of an opening being good/bad/playable doesn't arise and that opening becomes as good as any other.
Does anyone have any comments to disprove this opening with solid evidences? If not, then please don't write against this opening with "preconceived notions" or based on what you have heard so far from "others". If you have evidences then please post those evidences to help the community and people with little chess knowledge (like me)...
The fact that you think "an immediate winning combination against it" is the only valid drawback to an opening leads me to believe that even this opening, which is total crap, is playable against you. It wastes time, concedes initiative, doesn't make any threat or gain space, and drastically limits black's options right out of the gate. Those sound like drawbacks to me. The real question shouldn't be about drawbacks, though. It should be about advantages. This opening doesn't seem to have any.
It is a wierd opening so i like it . . . ches is not just about winning it is also about fun. . .
I'm not sure if I approve of the reasoning "it's not horrible so it must be good". This opening might not lead to an instant mate or even any loss of material but it makes you lose tempo. Those moves would be better spent developing other pieces.
lol, anyone who seriously considers this opening needs to take a deep breath and maybe some anti hullucinagenics!!
Jan 12, 2008
0
#38
I wouldn't play this opening as black. However, I don't think there is a refutation per se. I would probably seize the center with e4-d4-f4, castle queenside and launch an attack on black's king.
Of course, if black tries to put a pawn in the center, I would change my plan.
The main drawbacks of this opening are that it doesn't fight for the center, and puts the king in a less-safe-than-castle position (sorry for my English here ). So by all means I would keep queens on - I think trading queens is already an achievement for black.
Just for the record: I read all posts above, and then went play that opening against "Little Chess Partner".
Guess what:
1.e4 f6 2.Bc4
Got rid of the opening, before I could even try it...
Perhaps the question is what you would do as white, against 1. ...f6.
Would you let your opponent move the king?
It seems to me that after 2.Bc4, White has quite an advantage.
Jan 12, 2008
0
#40
bgangioni wrote:
Just for the record: I read all posts above, and then went play that opening against "Little Chess Partner".
Guess what:
1.e4 f6 2.Bc4
Got rid of the opening, before I could even try it...
Perhaps the question is what you would do as white, against 1. ...f6.
Would you let your opponent move the king?
It seems to me that after 2.Bc4, White has quite an advantage.
1.e4 f6 2.Bc4 e6!? and Kf7 next ?