The Barbarian
Sort:
I did some variations but I didn't get to check them, it was late and I was tired. It's probably riddled with errors, if anybody spots some let me know or post an edited version.
NoahBogosh wrote:
mateologist wrote:
paulgottlieb wrote:
Actually, Black has already developed his Nc6 and after Ba6 he will have developed his B as well as making in awkward for White to castle kingside. On top of that, he's a piece ahead.
Please don't take all this personally, this is just my opinion about the position--not about you. Let's just talk about moves. After 6.b6 what would you suggest?
Resignation !! Seems the OP has no idea how to access the dynamic nor static elements contained in the position. To sac a piece in the opening ala the ( ruy lopez) you better have an Attack or one hell of a Bind that destroys your opponents developement , After ..b6 don't forget to turn off the lights because the party is Over !!!!!
I don't understand...
You have NOTHING for the piece , not even the iniative after ..b6 you will be defending so what is the point of the Sac ? That is not a positional sacrifice it does not create dynamic potential in the position for white , there are no static elements other than the lost of that piece that matters. 
lol
no offense noah, but this opening kinda.....phales badly. Why on earth would white hang their bishop for black having an akwardly positioned pawn. The value just doesnt match up. here is proof that it doesnt do anything. Black can just go Ra5 to kick the queen.
NoahBogosh wrote:
People laugh when they see it, but are surprised when they are brought down with a few deft moves
Can't tell ya how surprised I'd be... 
Oh and Noah. Im an 1155 in real life. I would be glad to show you how weak it is in a real game.
OH and after the rook kicks the queen, black can also just push b6 to get rid of their "akward pawn" (which i dont really believe is that akward at all)
SchachMatt wrote:
I did some variations but I didn't get to check them, it was late and I was tired. It's probably riddled with errors, if anybody spots some let me know or post an edited version.
Thanks for posting this
Some pointers on how to improve it?
I guess what I am really looking for is an opening that looks unorthodox, but keeps black from developing early
but it doesnt Noah. Black just has to kick white's queen, and then they can develop, so they lose 1 move and white loses a bishop
SCOTTIEMAN7 wrote:
but it doesnt Noah. Black just has to kick white's queen, and then they can develop, so they lose 1 move and white loses a bishop
can you recommend anything that I am looking for?
i actually can
But the thing is. White's strongest attack is a strong position. THAT is really what you want. granted there are some openings that are very VERY! easy to thwart for black, and also, with the majority of these openings, if black does the smart thing, and thinks ahead, they wont take whatever bait you are looking for, leaving white the awful position instead of black. so i would recommend an opening that develops a strong position early, such as the English, and use that. :) (just a thought though)
...
NONSENSE
As a fellow amateur, I humbly suggest you give 4. Bc4 (Scotch Gambit) a try. Instead of sacrificing your light-square bishop sacrifice (your best attacking piece) and getting very little in return, you instead offer a pawn sacrifice for a lead in development.
Godspawn wrote:
NoahBogosh wrote:
Some pointers on how to improve it?
I guess what I am really looking for is an opening that looks unorthodox, but keeps black from developing early
Noah...the only thing you need to know about the opening is it is meant to get to a playable middle game. Once you get past beginner, you need to learn to get past these opening gimmicks if you want to improve.
Heed Those Words Noah: The fact of the matter is although it is white who has the first move it is BLACK who choses the defence ! Just stick to opening principals for now and you should be fine.
Thank you for all of your helpful comments. I will follow your advice.
p.s. I wonder when the "It-wasn't-me, it-was-my-little-brother" Defence will rear its ugly head