Indian game 1. d4 Nf6: one of top choices according to Stockfish is 2. h3 (+0.1). 
Some funny rare lines favoured by Stockfish
Sort:
Sep 15, 2017
0
#2
1 e4 c5 2 d3 is a legitimate line. The rest are just further proof that asking an engine what to do on move 2 is pointless.
By the way, I'm currently running Stockfish, and has [edit: 1 d4 Nf6] 2 h3 as its tenth choice (-0.05). This isn't close to an approval, not that such a thing would matter regardless.
Sep 15, 2017
0
#5
m_n0 wrote:
1 e4 c5 2 d3 is a legitimate line.
It's interesting. It seems that this line doesn't have any official name. The oldest games go back to 1935:
https://www.chess.com/games/search?f=1286722&sort=8&page=1
I've seen it called the "Big Clamp", referring to the pawn formation with e4/d3/c3/f4.
Sep 15, 2017
0
#7
m_n0 wrote:
I've seen it called the "Big Clamp", referring to the pawn formation with e4/d3/c3/f4.
Thanks! 
According to chesstempo database, the Big Clamp formation is indeed the unique officially named chess opening arising from 2. d3 in Sicilian.
Sep 15, 2017
0
#8
Well, Stockfish has some strange preference to h3. Actually, in Indian and QPG, it might be a preliminary move to play Bf4 cuz the bishop can retreat to h2.
I guess the computer doesn't believe in the idea to be careful with moving those rook file pawns as it weakens the side.
The computer also appears to think just about anything played in the opening is good enough.
With an attitude like that: I predict the computer won't do very well in chess.
Sep 15, 2017
0
#10
DeirdreSkye wrote:
Yigor , 2 things.
First we have all realised that your profile is full of lies.
You can't be professor of anything except maybe professor of nonsense.
Second , that your understanding about chess is close or possibly lower than 1200 FIDE.
It is laughable that you find 1.e4 e5 2.h3 ok because engine says so but can you explain us please why 2.h3 after 1.e5 e5 is good?What is white's goal?To prevent a later ...Bg4 or ...Ng4 or prepare an early g4?
I bet , you have absolutely no idea.
LoL U are the biggest clown in the Opening Forum, congratulations! 
Well said, @StupidGM
Sep 15, 2017
0
#12
StupidGM wrote:
m_n0 wrote:
1 e4 c5 2 d3 is a legitimate line. The rest are just further proof that asking an engine what to do on move 2 is pointless.
Because a 2000 player knows more than a 3500-rated engine?
Some very specific things perhaps yes: certain drawn positions and openings' move1-3 'soundness'. After all, the "weaker" openings Stockfish will evaluate as -0.6 or so down 12ply, yet before even reaching the twelfth move it will probably have equalized (0.00) or nearly so against an equally strong engine, or better against a human (+).
I don't see any problem here, nor any problem with Stockfish's evaluations.
1: e4 e5 2: h3 (0.00)
This is a completely correct evaluation. White hasn't made any mistake at all, h3 is a perfectly unobjectionable move. However, he has given up his first-move advantage by not playing development. Of course, this move is completely objectionable in the sense that white could have played something much better (2: d4 2: Nf3 2: Nc3 2: f4 2: Bc4 etc.) but it doesn't give black a weakness to a attack or a positional help, which is why I said it's "unobjectionable". It just wastes a move that white could have used on something better and equalizes the position that was previously in white's favor.
This is true in all of the 2: h3 moves the computer gave as equal (or sometimes +0.1). The position is solid, so it doesn't do anything to help the opponent, but it wastes a move that could have been spent on something better and gives up first move advantage.
h3 is a BAD move (rather than just a waste of a move) in open or sharp positions where white's tempi need to be used constructively. For example, 1: e4 e5 2: f4 exf4 3: h3. This move is extremely bad because the position is sharp and demands immediate action from white. He can't afford to waste a move. I'm guessing 3: ...Qh4+ is a good way to continue.
However, in positions where tempi come at a pretty low cost, rook pawn moves aren't bad at all, they just waste tempi and give up advantages centered around tempi.
Sep 16, 2017
0
#14
PieceofPoo: Your avatar expresses well your nature and the quality of your posts.
Sep 16, 2017
0
#15
DeirdreSkye: I'm not planning to prove anything to anyone, especially to U. Btw xman720 explained it perfectly and answered your question.
Sep 16, 2017
0
#16
DeirdreSkye wrote:
Yigor wrote:
DeirdreSkye: I'm not planning to prove anything to anyone, especially to U. Btw xman720 explained it perfectly and answered your question.
Yigor , not only you are not professor , I doubt that you finished highschool.
Probably you graduated last and because the teachers wanted to get rid of you before they shoot themselves.
Yeah, U caught me, I'm still in the kindergarten.
Sep 16, 2017
0
#17
The truth is that engine haters also use engines but they are too scary to admit it.
Who said that I blindly trust Stockfish ?!? I just pointed out at its curious choices.
Sep 16, 2017
0
#19
aHorseWithNoName wrote:
yigor lets play an unrated game.
No problem, please send me a challenge (rated or unrated). 
N.B. Currently, I have too many (143) daily games here so I don't promise to reply quickly.
Funky news for engine haters. It might prove that Stockfish doesn't understand chess openings.
[Or, alternatively, that the orthodox understanding is biased 
]. Just looking at 5 best lines in Indian, Sicilian, KPG and QPG we get the following unorthodox openings: