Some people play openings like this, openings that lose the advantage, in order to throw off their opponent. While some openings are statistically better, this opening can, assuming they are not playing someone who knows every opening line by heart, this strategy can prove effective. If this strategy is not very effective, chances are that it will be at least effective enough to cover the it's loss. Just think, how would you continue this? Not many people would know this line.
Solkosky
Sort:
Many strong tournament players use slightly offbeat openings such as Sokolsky, or Queens Pawn games such as Colle, Veresov etc when they play weaker opponents. They rely on their superior skill to outplay their opponent in the middle game. This way they can keep their home analysis in their main openings until they really need them when facing a strong opponent in an important game.
I even heard an IM say that he sometimes played the Colle when he wanted a strategically less complex game when he had a hangover.
Can someone help me understand why any well-informed tournament player would choose the Solkosky Opening (also called Orangatan)?
It just seems that black has too many ways to equalize, or even get an advantage. 1...e5 2.Bb2 Bxb4 3.Bxe5 Nf6, equalizing, or 1...d5, grabbing control of the center. How can white justify this odd first move?