The Grob (Thoughts?)

To start the post, here is a game I recently played in the grob (OTB, 45|0). The variation was kind of odd but featured a common early rook trade.

This wasn't a mainline, but had some common Grob themes, like the open H file and the strong bishop presence on the long diagonal.

Here is mainline:

Common themes: c4, Bg2, Qb3 for white, with tons of pressure on b7. Very open game, where white chooses to use the idea, "the best defense is offense," or else face a very difficult wave of attacking black pieces.

Obviously g4 e5 is a whole different thing, with h3 being a little more common in those games. I have had great bullet success, and decent online blitz/standard results. My OTB success has been about 50/50, depending on the persons ability to use knowledge over memory. Anyone else care to share some lines, opinions, or ideas?

It's an opening that instantly gives Black the advantage, so there is no real reason behind playing it (except for having fun or showing off).

Agreed (and not just because it's a WGM's opinion ).

Despite my fondness for the Grob, I have to concede that best play leads to a black advantage.

If you know the theory though, then it is very much playable in all lines.  In addition you gain a huge pyschological advantage over your opponent.  A trained Grobber can cause black a lot of problems.

I would play anyone in a Grob game.

Now the Borg Defense is another matter.  Even with best play I wonder if black is refuted.

1.e4 g5 2.d4 and now:

2...e6 is my variation.  This is critical and has been the only variation that does not lose for black so far.  My theory is not nearly as developed as my Grob theory. 

I still feel that is somewhat gimicky as black has to fight hard for equality first.

My version of Fritz likes 2. .. Nc6  much better than 2. .. Bxg4...

White doesn't look too bad after 3.c4 dxc4  4.Bxc6+ bxc6  (tripled pawns!) 5.h3 h5  6.g5 e5  7.Qa4

Great article, btw; and the comments are interesting too, cept this one:( :)

Bloodgood was fairly strong and offered some lines as well, but since he played in prison his rating got inflated.

Out of curiosity, can anyone give me some idea of where black can really mess up white? Obviously white comprimises the kingside, but I have rarely had a game where I lost because of dynamic moves by black in the opening (of course, blunders have done me in a number of times).

For those wishing to play Basman's Grob, Read the annotations of Raymond Keene on the game Basman V. Keene, Manchester, 1981, 0-1, available at http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1026281

The basic problem with the Grob is that Black must make a mistake for White to win. There does not appear to be a line where White can maintain an advantage, however small, over Black if Black plays correctly. The Grob, in my opinion, could be played as White as a "change up" opening for which an opponent is unlikely to be prepared for. If White knows the opening well, White capitalize on tactical inaccuracies of Black's play. If Black is a good tactician, however, it is unlikely that White will win as the advantage belongs to Black from the opening move.

Isn't this the basic problem of all chess openings?

 Absolutely not. In most of the sound opening systems, White enjoys a small advantage. That is why White wins a small percentage more games than does Black. Examples: in ther Ruy Lopez, Whites wins 35.9% of the time whereas Black only 23.5%. in the Giuoco Piano, White 29.5%, Black 30%, in the QGD: White 37.3%, Black 20.6%.

Even in the most solid defenses such as the Sicilian systems, Black starts at a small disadvantage. Black wins 29.9% while White 36.1%.

Overall, as a player, you should see that your winning percentage for White is a few points higher than your winning percentage for Black.

For the Grob: Black wins 50% while White only 37.5%

Yes, but up until now it has never been demonstrated that white can convert that advantage into a win if black doesn't make any mistakes. There have been claims, historically, that 1.e4 wins by force given perfect play for both sides, but most will agree that the expected result is a draw.

That's a highly theoretical issue, though: The reality is that players will often make small mistakes, and players will often fail to capitalize on their opponent's mistakes (which in itself qualifies as a mistake). In light of this, you do need black to make a mistake win as white, even with a "proper" opening. That's not unusual and it's true for any chess match. As Savielly Tartakower put it: "The winner of the game is the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."

I definitely agree with Tartakower! I have won a lot of games by making the next to last blunder.  Probably all us have.

In openings, the advantage White has is not enough to guarantee or force a win. But White starts with the advantage to push. In so-called "perfect play", the outcome would be a draw but such play is very difficult to achieve if not impossible. Positional compensation, equalization and centipawn advantages are very difficult to control for either player if perfect play is invoked. I can only measure centipawn changes using computer analysis ... the best I can do while playing is judge whether or not a player has an advantage of some sort over the other IF the pieces in pawn are equal. It the positions are complex, I can't even do that.

The point is that the Grob is an imperfect choice for White because White immediately has given away their advantage by opening choice for the confidence that they can outplay their opponent in this line. Good players never believe that their opponents will make moves that are suboptimal but that is what is required for White to win in the Grob.

Now, if I could only stop making suboptimal moves!