Which openings or lines used to be considered ok and are now considered bust.

After 15 years of not being able to play because of Multiple Sclerosis I started playing again here on Chess.Com a year past March. I never stopped reading about chess, I have every Chess Magazine back to the year dot (courtesy of my father) but playing OTB was beyond me. I collapsed at the board in the last tournament I played in in 198? at the Glasgow open and have not attempted OTB since. I have joined the local club, here in Inverness and enjoy meeting like-minded people and talking about chess and the good ole days on the Scottish chess scene. I have started a blog following my quest to return to OTB next season. My question is this; what openings or lines once considered ok some 15 years ago are now considered bust? For instance I play the Grunfeld and would like to mix it up with the Benko. But is it still alive and that is just one example. Sicilian Dragon was dying on it's feet when I was active has it been reborn? Since I played, 15 years ago, chess seems to have become more dynamic because of databases etc. If anyone would like to open this discussion beyond openings into a more broad discussion about how chess has changed, feel free.

another question. The above screed had paragraph breaks and line gaps to make it more readable but every time I submit it comes out in a block. Help?

1. The Benko Gambit is in serious trouble theoretically

2. The Sicilian Dragon is alright, but extremely hard for both sides to play

3. idk what the deal is with the lack of paragraph breaks

I type it out in paragraphs with double line breaks and it shows up as above. The Benko was beginning to come under threat when I was active. I was in on it at the beginning and scored heavily

Boris Avrukh's Grandmaster Repertoire series on 1. d4 comes close to refuting the Benko outright.

Idon't know what what the hell there talking about

Agree with khpa21. What's the current d4 antidote. I like my grunfeld but I need some variety! What does sbnick not understand. A Benko player? Going to buy Avrukh's book it fills in the gaps in my English and makes me less worried about transpositions. Marin's Grandmaster Repertoire are the best books I've read in a long time!

Yes,hushpuckena, I too find it fascinating how some things have changed and others have stayed the same. Easy one first. Against Nf3 I don't play Nf6. Instead either g6,d6 or c5. I play the Modern/Pirc or any of the Indians. I consider myself a master of the transposition so the options are numerous. Against the English, it's always hard to play against what you see as your winning weapon. As a Scotsman I prefer to call it the Scottish or Bannockburn attack depending on your knowledge of Scottish history! Again it's a question of transposition. Mostly play Nf6 hoping for favourable transitions. Most likely ending up in Dragon reversed or Karpov's h6 line. I have worked really hard on all aspects of my chess, being hospitalized or wheelchair bound leaves you plenty of time. Although I recently went back to my job after 4 months off cuting down my time a bit. Hospital in particular is a great place to study, no nagging from my wife. LOL

The Modern is under a bit of a cloud. However recently I have picked up on Benjamin's ideas which have the added bonus of looking passive or plain bad but are actually pretty potent. Nf3,g6 and a possible transposition to Modern or Pirc removes The Austrian and those pesky f3 or Spike Systems!

I'm curious about the term, "busted". Does it mean, for white, that a "busted" opening no longer gives white the theoretical "initiative" of having the first move? Or, for black, it no longer "equalizes"?

Or is it more dire than that?

Oh, trysts, welcome back. Either colour, any opening, any line. Busted comes in all the shades of grey you mentioned. as far as "dire" goes I would only say refuted, unplayable. At it's worse you get laughed at if you play it!

---

Hi So, "refuted", and "unplayable" means the opening/variation is now a clear loss?

Ok guys. Clearly I have to define busted. It was a word I used to make the question more concise.Clearly some openings/lines are in the conventional sense busted. For the purposes of this debate we can go all the way down the scale of "busted". Regularly played but have moved in the time scale I stipulated from regularly played to being out of favour for a specific reason. Clear enough? Fezzik got it right, a re-evaluation similar to Karpov's criteria but for the timescale 1996 to present day.

Speaking as a lesser mortal, I agree. I am looking forward to competitive chess!

Thanks for the definitions for "busted"

I am going to be busy for a week. Upon my return I would like to extend this discussion. A few ideas, expand next week. The Scandanavian, certain lines in Sicilian, Catalan, Benoni,Budapest, Albin Counter Gambit, Slav etc. Looking forward to the comments already.

It's easy to determine now. Just let Stockfish handle your suspected busted line and you prove it.

One thing to keep in mind is that when you talk about an opening being "busted", you are talking from a theoretical point of view.  Both players can use resources, computers, and have oodles of time, and perfect play is executed from both sides.  Playing a 5-minute Blitz game and winning does not validate that an opening is busted or not busted (if the side that is said to be "busted" ends up winning).  Playing an opening that you hate from one side or the other (or in my case, both sides, that being the Najdorf Sicilian) doesn't mean the line is "busted".  The Najdorf is one of the most respectable openings there is - I just hate it.  Same thing goes with the bust line - theoretically, not necessarily what I play or my "opinion".  For example, I normally answer the King's Gambit with 2...Bc5, but the true bust is accepting it!

All of that said, I would qualify the following as "busted" with the line(s) to refute it in parenthesis.  As far as I'm concerned, there are four such openings if you exclude the complete BS, like Domiano's Defense:

Albin-Countergambit (3.dxe5 d4 4.a3! intending 5.e3, but 4.e3?? is a blunder)

Benko Gambit (Fianchetto Variation)

Alekhine's Defense (Classical Variation - 4.Nf3)

King's Gambit (2...exf4 and 3...d5 against 3.Nf3 or 3.Bc4)

Also you can add the Moller Attack in the Giuoco Piano. I stopped playing it after it was obvious m y opponents also knew the 20+ moves of theory. 

The Alekhine's Defense is not busted, though. The pin 4...Bg4 is a bit troubling for me, though I haven't memorized much of the theory in that.

And the Dragon is very, very close to busted in my opinion.

1.e4 Nf6? 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 Bg4 5.Be2 - Problem Solved

The Dragon is not busted.  The Dragon is for players that like to play Checkers.  In other words, if you want to play a game that's already been completely figured out to a forced draw, then play the Dragon.  If you want any hope of winning at the higher levels, throw the Dragon in the trash!