Sokolsky Opening. Has anyone had success persisting with the lines

I just watched this video on black’s strategy against the sokolsky

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kpn-DWUettE&time_continue=171&embeds_referring_euri=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F

Has anyone played against this strange move by black…..C6??

Immediately it takes away the b5 option which I liked in other openings if the opportunity arose.

anyone who isnt merely testing the sokolsky will know what to do vs c6.

one of my fastest wins vs an expert in otb happened like this

premature but my opponent resigned after bxc5.
the only line that i dont like to see with c6 is 1.b4 c6 2.bb2 a5 because the recommended move is b5!? with a very interesting gambit. It is quite dangerous actually in practice, although if black plays it like an engine, he may end up with like a 0.5 edge after some arduous defense. I am not an attacker and dont play gambits, so the worry my opponent is booked to the teeth in accepting this gambit line ,especially in an OTB game does concern me ( it has never happened in my whole chess career though, and i have played 1.b4 in almost every tournament i have played).
the solution to that worry is either 3.bxa5 ?! which is unfortunate but not too bad or to play 2.e3 /2.c4 but this leads to its own possibilities that are poorly explored.

here is an example of the gambit line i mentioned earlier.

its a very polarizing position. Engine says roughly equal but players will tend to heavily favor one side of this position over the other. Im not saying i necessarily PREFER blacks position but dont like the pressure of being a pawn down playing with white here would give me. if white plays conservatively and doesnt begin a big attack, he will likely just be worse.

wow. That’s a neat trap earlier . When I saw the video presented it went through a few opening dynamics. White playing e4 or d4 too early if at all looked dubious though. So should they be avoided after c6?

yeah those lines he over are kind of wack, e4 is never played unless you play the gambit line with b5. In fact, its prob one of the very few times you should ever play e4 in the sokolsky (only major line which has e4 is 1.b4 e5 2.bb2 f6!? 3.e4!?! which is super romantic gambit line.Much safer is 3.b5

In your last illustration white looks better positionally but a pawn down. Perhaps drawish on first glance?

oh no, its not drawish, never confuse an eval near 0 with "drawish". often one side will come come crashing down, either black gets a nasty attack or white recoups his pawn with a nasty space and development lead OR black successfully calms down the flames and whites position deteriorates into a lost endgame.
the engine gives that position -0.2. which is rather a testament to a very fine balance. White has enough space and activity to never be worse if he plays correctly but if he drops the ball, black will simply be better. likewise, if black gets careless, he can be nuked off the board. One idea you often see if black plays and early e6 for example, is h4, and rh3 , an idea you encountered in some aggressive white lines vs the french defense.
my objection to this line as white is entirely stylistic. this gambit is better than 80% of gambits out there.

https://www.chess.com/game/139969709440

Not a great game but it did have an interesting checkmate.

well done chessterd5. Nice to see you playing b4!! and an interesting checkmate on the way for you

well, my question to Miguel is whether he sees B4 openings at his level from other players. I played a chess coach once for a draw and he said he had never seen it played in chess players over 2100 elo in tournament play. I said I’m only 1750 elo and only play occasional social. I like what Carsten Hansen said about the exchange variation. C3 instead of C4. Wait for exactly the right moment to exchange your bishop for the knight. Then populate the black squares with your pawns. I’m not good enough to understand why but I felt it was more a closed position game which I like against much higher ranked players. My goal is a draw if I am lucky.

Others say B4 ….it’s more positional play rather than tactical play.

Positional

Focus: Long-term strategic goals, gradual improvement of position, and control of space

Tactical

Focus: Immediate tactical opportunities, forcing sequences of moves, and creating complications.
Key elements: Calculations, sacrifices, combinations, and exploiting weaknesses

Not sure what he meant or even if it is right or wrong.

I just looked at the evaluation. It is a forced mate in five. I am surprised that I played all the moves in the sequence correctly. I concentrated on not allowing an escape square.

no, you wont. But that doesnt tell you much. The odds that you as the black pieces at my level see any other opening besides (1.e4 1.d4, 1.nf3 and 1.c4) is relatively low. i dont think i ever faced even 1.b3 in a tournament game before, certainly not at any level 1800+ in classical. Last time i even faced the next most popular opening after the big 4 (1.g3) was agaisnt a 2400 many years ago who knew my playing style and used it specifically to avoid some of my favorite lines like b6. (he lost by move 5 lmao, 1.g3 d5 2.bg2 nf6 3.c4 dxc4 4.na3 c6 5.nxc4? qd5! 1-0, he tried 6.e4 qxe4 7.qe2 to try to trick me with nd6 but i converted easily)
yeah , the c3 method was a godsend. It was beginning to get tedious for me to memorize all these sidelines within the exchange with the c4 method only for the computer to still say black is prob slightly better. If anything the c3 method pisses off black players even more, because white ends up with a very solid structure so all that development lead feels somewhat pointless. in the c4 line, they were always "tries" to exploit it, including that infamous rxe3 sacrifice line lapshun discusses in his book. They are some things you can try with black ,like try to win the d pawn with the rook pinning the e file and what not , but the antidotes once learn put a quick stop to those ideas.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yFlM2-VFKCU

Can you believe it??? The commentators are in shock as Magnus plays B4. But not only that. Magnus plays C3 as well when C4 was the more conventional line!!!…..There it is and the commentators are even more puzzled.Against Giri too who is very high level in competition.They thought Magnus wanted to play the English opening but moved the wrong pawn which was very funny.

carlsen played it twice, agaisnt giri and nakamura. Agaisnt giri he got a good position but coudnt convert it to a win, agaisnt naka he actually "blundered" the d pawn but its a position thats very drawish even without it. Both were draws.
But those two games were the inspiration behind an entirely new way of playing the line. Its such a funny thing too. Carlsen casually played an opening twice and practically changed its entire theory overnight!

Magnus plays G3 later??. Wow. From Magnus Carlsen. So there MUST be theory in this move.The commentators are suggesting blunders everywhere and telling the chess world not to play this opening. To not play B4??. Wow

These aren't the moves. ...Qd5?? loses the queen and Qd4? is +1.20 for White.

I think 2 Bg2 and 2... Nf6 were not played.

Aside: for some reason when I post moves (or even quote someone else's moves) that begin with a number and a period, chess.com strips them out (mostly). So I have to go back and edit the post.

1.g3 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.na3 c6 4.nxc4?? qd5. i think my opponent was aiming for a reti formation, and preferred a 1.g3 move order since i play b6 a lot. He likely messed up lines in his head as a result. in the normal reti ,the knight is on f3 first so no weak rook shenanigans.

b4 is actually the most crazy line ever strategically its like white has an equal postions these postions are very tactical in fact anna cramling lost to a gm so playing these postions against weaker foes may be the thing but e5 jsut gives black a betetr postion and white defnes a worse postion