Forums

Would You Play This???

Sort:
Taichung
Taichung
Dec 6, 2009
0
#101

If I was Andersson playing on web chess sites I would probably play it. Cool

Otherwise I would not!! Wink

bizwala
bizwala
Aug 17, 2010
0
#102
Atos wrote:
Just_testing wrote:

It is unusual so has a certain surprise value, I suggested it as an opening move the other night to a junior whom prefered playing with the Black pieces. The idea being that you give Black the initiative, but you have played a move that may have merit in certain lines.

It is quite often a useful move actually, whether to prevent the opponent's bishop or knight from coming to b4, or to provide a retreat field for your king's bishop. Maybe even to play b4 but probably u don't want to do that on move 2.

bizwala
bizwala
Aug 17, 2010
0
#103

I have been playing chess from my childhood and then represent my university team for championship. I hardly loss game with white pawn and start games from bishop. I still feel upset about the day when our university loss by half point the championship cup. if i have won last game instead of drawing we would have won.

[url=http://www.bizwala.com/marketing/]LAS VEGAS SEO[/url]

polydiatonic
polydiatonic
Show your flair!
Aug 17, 2010
0
#104
Elubas wrote:

Uh, I hate these topics, because of course 1 a3 is playable, but when all the flaws are pointed out about it, someone decides that a couple of wins with 1 a3 change everything. a3 as a first move is playable but it makes more sense to try to make use of your first move in some way or another to try to get the initiative. I faced 1 a3, in fact I lost the game though I had at least an equal position out of the opening so honestly I was happy. It was not because I just assumed it was an awful move though, but just because of normal mistakes and blunders that happen in any amateur game. Honestly a3 would probably get fairly similar results most amateurs have with say 1 e4 and some suprise value, but still why give up anything on the first move? If you make a mistake after a3 you're worse, with e4 or d4 probably just equal. We can all live with our position after one dubious move, but they add up... or we just blunder everything in one move, either way.

Yes these kinds of threads make me sick.  Another novice telling us how basically giving black the advantage of the first move is a great opening.  The lack of depth of understanding of this basic thought makes me a little ill. In fact....

polydiatonic
polydiatonic
Show your flair!
Aug 17, 2010
0
#105
southpawsam wrote:
polydiatonic wrote:
boy678 wrote:
southpawsam wrote:

You are all worng.

I am playing right now and have had three players and they all have lost badly

Any more comments

 No, i wouldnt play it. It looks horrible in order to control the centre squares. 1...a3 gives your oppenent the idea you have no idea whatsoever what you're doing. If you want something better, try playing 1...d4.

You have a very closed and limited view of the opening. I'm basing this on your comments, your "game" that you included and lastly your anemic rating.   Btw, it's not a bad idea to give your opponent the idea that "you have no idea" of what you're doing. It's actually a pretty good stratedgy at times.  Especially if the thing that you're doing is actually not really bad. Point being 1.a3 is not "bad", it's just not good.  It's really a non-commital "pass" of the first move to black.  In other words all of the negative comments you made about white's opening are the same thing as saying about blacks position b4 he's made his first move.  If you don't understand what I mean try thinking really hard about it before you respond with some nasty/aggressive comment as if you were some sort of master.  As a real life chess player my rating is around 2000uscf (although only 1820 here).  That doesn't make me = kasparov or anything, but it does mean that I have a very good working knowledge of the game and that I'm in the top 10% or so of all rated chess players in the world.  That's pretty good in my book.  You, as a 1200 player should be less concerned about how "horrible" a move looks and more concerned with what, if any, problems or solutions a move creates.  1.a3 doesn't solve anything, but it also doesn't create any problems.   As a 1200 player your main goal should probably be learning how to survive the first 10 -15 moves of the game without doing anything really dumb.

 "As a 1200 player your main goal should probably be learning how to survive the first 10 -15 moves of the game without doing anything really dumb."

Make sure I don't make any "nasty/aggressive comment"???

What do you call your comment???

I am pretty sure of a few things...

1) You probably never played against 1.a3!?

2) You have never seen an antidote to 1.a3!? in any opening book

3) You have never even thought of playing 1.a3!? before

Your making a very harsh jugdement on an opening you have rarely seen. I think it would be better to study some games after 1.a3/2.b4 and then make your judgement.

Another point about 1.a3 is playing it against amatuers only. Here is my point. If you know you can play stronger positional chess than your opponent, why not play 1.a3? He cannot rely on any theory he has learned and you can come in for the kill.

Maybe I will have to play you in a CC game and see how you do.

Any more comments???

Still feeling like tossing my lunch from this thread, but I notice your rating has gone up like 200 points to reach 1400 since when you started this silly thread.

ldeleon
ldeleon
Aug 17, 2010
0
#106

Rybka gives white a winning advantage after 1 a3!! due to 54 Nd5+ winning black's queen. ;P