the Grob attack

1.g4.

upon seeing this move most people don't have a clue what to do. it is a seemingly unwise move that almost inveriably leads to one side taking an early, punishing advantage.

it is the Grob attack, and i believe it deserves some real discussion on this site.

after 1.g4, this is the ideal play for white.

after this variation, black definately has a slight positional advantage and more developed pieces, but as you can see, there is nothing black can do to keep from losing a valuable rook on white's next turn. this, and other similar traps, is what makes the Grob's attack so vicious.

now, please discuss.

And that side is usually black. 1.g4 d5 2.Bg2 e5 and it's playable but there's nothing spectacular for white.

even after 2... e5, it can lead to an interesting game in which white attempts to control the center from the kingside flank. and even in high level games, the simple act of starting with the grob's attack is enough to ut an opponent off balence and lead them into either doubting their moves too much in the middle game or getting cockey and making mistakes early on. it takes intuitive thinking from white, but it can still lead to a strong game from white.

I agree that preforming the Grob takes a certain amount of arrogance, but that is kinda the point. the streanght in the move set come from the fact that it either causes your oppenent to get really cocky (easilly exploitable, even from the disadvantaged position the grob leaves white in in most variations), or it let's you get inside their heads and make them doubt their every move, which is hard to do online, but in live chess or over a real chessboard, i've seen that doubt cause players to waste most of their clock thinking and then they have to rush at the end while white make's slow, deliberate moves.

even Grob, the man who the opening was named for, did not play the opening often. but when he did play it, he usualy won. and for the reasons i cited above. playing the grob's attack has it's obvious drawbacks, and most of the time they outweigh the advantages, but there are times when it works. don't beleive me? go to live and use it in a 1 minute game.

• 12 minutes ago · Quote · #8

  tubebender  

  What about 1 g4, g5? Then what? 

• then i would develop with 2. e3

1.g4?! d5 2.Bg2?! Bxg4! 3.c4 c6, and Black is already better. The strategy is quite easy: After an eventual Qb3, Black does not bother about the b7 pawn, and develops with ...Nf6, ...e6 etc (notice a cheap trick: 4.cxd5 cxd5 5.Qb3 e6?? --5.,. Nf6! is correct-- 6.Qa4+ and the g4 bishop is going south), and when white takes on b7, simplly ...Nbd7, and white has a very bad position: misplaced queen, damaged pawn structure, and a kling likely to be stuck in the center for many moves. Black has very easy development, and no weaknesses.

But why would you give 2....Bxg4 an exclamation ?

I don't doubt your expertise....I highly respect it....but I was just curious.

Quite simply because it does permanent damage to the white pawn structure, not because "it's winning a pawn". As I said, Black could (and should) return the pawn, instead of playing dubious stuff to hold it.

like i said, it takes clever play on white's part to avoid that kind of situation for white.

Well you can win with anything in bullet, like the triple Muzio, because your opponent has no time to think.

i'm just going to take this one last post, as i have obviously started what i intended. i caused a serious and involved discussion about a rarely used, unorthodox opening. i have played the devil's advocate for what really is arguably the 2nd worst opening ever. i'll leave it be now.

I occasionally play the Delayed Grob Attack when up against the f5 Dutch.

1. d4  f5

2. g4 

....and things get indubitably dubious very quick........

(w/ the intent of 3. e4 upon fxg....)

@ rdecredico, if this discussion was neither serious, nor involved, why are there people citing lines of moves, variations, etc.? i admitted i was playing the devil's advocate, i hold very little real merit in the Grob's attack. but u have to admit i got you guys talking about it.

Thanks, pfren. Your recommendation is now part of my personal defense against the Grob.

Most biographes generally available state that Grob played 1.g4 in 'hundreds' of games. This in itself suggests one hundred games at the very least and back in a era before personal computers, chess engines and e.mail, that is quite a few.

In Claude F Bloogood's mongraph "The tactical Grob", Grob's name is attached to 122 1.g4 games as White and 10 as Black.

122 serious games in a whole lifetime where he used that? even back then that isn't much.

I've played the Grob lots on FICS. It *is* cheap. While it does catch out lots of (other) hacks looking to keep their b7 pawn - but for any other continuation it is pretty weak. Even with a rook for bishop exchange, White spends the whole rest of the game trying to compensate for a weak pawn structure.

Did I say? I don't think I even infered it. Let me repeat, all available biographies state that Grob tested 1.g4 in HUNDRED's of games. Thats plural, in another words not less than two hundred.

And you do realise that the Grob's game with 1.g4 where mostly if not entirely correspondence played in the era of snail mail.

It's almost as strong as 2.Qh5