Black playing as white means that white has made a suboptimal move that isn't an outright blunder but gave up whites initiative/first move advantage. In this context at least.
Is it possible for neither side to have the initiative?
I love water
Water is very important.
Black playing as white means that white has made a suboptimal move that isn't an outright blunder but gave up whites initiative/first move advantage. In this context at least.
Is it possible for neither side to have the initiative?
Thats an interesting question not gonna lie. I suppose in dead drawn positions there are no initiative for either sides.
What is your point in starting thread after thread asking people to give their opinion on some dubious opening move you made up?
If it's not frequently played by the masters, it is probably not too great. If it's almost never played by the masters, it is probably just plain bad.
How is it any of your business whether or not I choose to make threads that request whether a certain move is bad or not? I am not doing anything wrong by asking whether any openings are dubious or not, I am allowed to ask a question in order to find the correct information so I can decide for myself whether or not an opening is dubious.
How can your second statement be proven? Do you have proof that just because a certain opening was never played by masters that it must somehow be bad?
I asked what your point is. I did not say you are not allowed to start these threads.
So, what is your point?
My point is to find out whether or not these openings are dubious. Surely that must be a good thing.
I read the couple earlier threads and every time you were given an answer, you just went why? No matter what the answer, you seem to ask why. Why?
I always do the right thing by questioning everything instead of accepting everything I hear to be true without explanation. I will only stop enquiring once I have been provided proof.
Your approach is rather similiar to the one the Flat Earth community has. Just always keep questioning, no matter what you are told and never accept anything as proof.
Multiple good reasons have already been provided in this thread as to why the move is bad, you just will not accept the truth and that’s all there is to it.
You are trying to make the act of constantly questioning and enquiring look bad by comparing it the lack of reason that flat earthers possess. You are complaining even when constantly questioning everything leads to factually derived truths as opposed to the assumptions and lack of logic that your strawman arguments are in relation to.
I don't just need explanations, I need proof, evidence is not proof unless there is no room for the possible outcomes to be to the contrary. I believe in thoroughness.
The things that you are claiming are wrong with this opening must first be exploited in order to be considered weaknesses. You must first prove how they can be exploited.
Wrong.
I do not need to prove anything for the weaknesses to be weaknesses. Just like I do not need to prove that the Earth is spherical in order for it to be spherical.
Also, the weaknesses are weaknesses and they do not stop being weaknesses if they are not exploited. Just like a hanging piece does not stop being a hanging piece if it is not captured (unless you defend it of course).
PS. Could you show me one of those factually derived truths you constantly questioning everything has led to?
What is your point in starting thread after thread asking people to give their opinion on some dubious opening move you made up?
If it's not frequently played by the masters, it is probably not too great. If it's almost never played by the masters, it is probably just plain bad.
How is it any of your business whether or not I choose to make threads that request whether a certain move is bad or not? I am not doing anything wrong by asking whether any openings are dubious or not, I am allowed to ask a question in order to find the correct information so I can decide for myself whether or not an opening is dubious.
How can your second statement be proven? Do you have proof that just because a certain opening was never played by masters that it must somehow be bad?
I asked what your point is. I did not say you are not allowed to start these threads.
So, what is your point?
My point is to find out whether or not these openings are dubious. Surely that must be a good thing.
I read the couple earlier threads and every time you were given an answer, you just went why? No matter what the answer, you seem to ask why. Why?
I always do the right thing by questioning everything instead of accepting everything I hear to be true without explanation. I will only stop enquiring once I have been provided proof.
Your approach is rather similiar to the one the Flat Earth community has. Just always keep questioning, no matter what you are told and never accept anything as proof.
Multiple good reasons have already been provided in this thread as to why the move is bad, you just will not accept the truth and that’s all there is to it.
You are trying to make the act of constantly questioning and enquiring look bad by comparing it the lack of reason that flat earthers possess. You are complaining even when constantly questioning everything leads to factually derived truths as opposed to the assumptions and lack of logic that your strawman arguments are in relation to.
I don't just need explanations, I need proof, evidence is not proof unless there is no room for the possible outcomes to be to the contrary. I believe in thoroughness.
The things that you are claiming are wrong with this opening must first be exploited in order to be considered weaknesses. You must first prove how they can be exploited.
Wrong.
I do not need to prove anything for the weaknesses to be weaknesses. Just like I do not need to prove that the Earth is spherical in order for it to be spherical.
Also, the weaknesses are weaknesses and they do not stop being weaknesses if they are not exploited. Just like a hanging piece does not stop being a hanging piece if it is not captured (unless you defend it of course).
PS. Could you show me one of those factually derived truths you constantly questioning everything has led to?
If something cannot be exploited it's not a weakness. As long as a player is capable of exploiting a weakness it's a weakness. I didn't say that a weakness is no longer a weakness just because a player refused to exploit them, I said a weakness is no longer able to be a weakness if a player is not able to exploit them, you have completely missed what I have said. You expect me to believe to even though you cannot prove and backup your claims, I know the earth is round because there is proof.
It is not good.
The most common responses against it are fairly bad but still definitely favor black. Nf6 attacks both pawns while developing a knight. Nc6 defends their pawn while developing a knight. Both those moves have 59% win rates and engine evaluations of about -1.0. Though Nc6 is almost surely better than Nf6. d6 is another common response with a 57% winrate. It pressures the g pawn with the bishop and defends the center. There are a lot of other moves that do pretty well against this. None of the common moves against it are particularly favorite to white. Even Qg5 only has a 50% loss rate. So your opponent is probably gonna play a "meh" move and it's gonna be like they gained 100 ELO for the rest of the game.
However, the most catastrophic way this opening can be destroyed is with 2... d5.
This threatens to completely take the center while also making the same pressure on the g pawn as before.
Overall I would say this opening heavily favors black. And while humans don't actually play it as well as they could even above 2000 rating, there is no way for black to actually get into a losing position other than major stupidity.
There's no point on opting to play this specific opening, because you are literally just wasting a move....
I asked chatGPT doing a roleplay prompt what it thinks. It does not like this opening for roughly the same reasons I don't think it's good.
"As ChessGPT, I must say that 1. e4 e5 2. g4, commonly known as the Grob's Attack, is generally not considered a strong opening by most chess players and theorists.
While the move 1.e4 is a strong opening move that controls the center and develops the king's pawn, the move 2.g4 neglects the principles of chess opening strategy.
By advancing the g-pawn so early, White creates weaknesses in their own position, such as weakening the king's position and leaving the f3-square undefended. Black can often exploit these weaknesses by developing their pieces quickly and seizing control of the center.
Furthermore, the Grob's Attack does not put any immediate pressure on Black's position, and it allows Black to gain a lead in development by responding with moves such as Nc6, d5 or Bc5.
Therefore, while 1.e4 is a strong opening move, 2.g4 is considered to be a dubious move that does not conform to the principles of sound chess strategy."
It is not good.
The most common responses against it are fairly bad but still definitely favor black. Nf6 attacks both pawns while developing a knight. Nc6 defends their pawn while developing a knight. Both those moves have 59% win rates and engine evaluations of about -1.0. Though Nc6 is almost surely better than Nf6. d6 is another common response with a 57% winrate. It pressures the g pawn with the bishop and defends the center. There are a lot of other moves that do pretty well against this. None of the common moves against it are particularly favorite to white. Even Qg5 only has a 50% loss rate. So your opponent is probably gonna play a "meh" move and it's gonna be like they gained 100 ELO for the rest of the game.
However, the most catastrophic way this opening can be destroyed is with 2... d5.
This threatens to completely take the center while also making the same pressure on the g pawn as before.
Overall I would say this opening heavily favors black. And while humans don't actually play it as well as they could even above 2000 rating, there is no way for black to actually get into a losing position other than major stupidity.
What's whites best response to d5?
I asked chatGPT doing a roleplay prompt what it thinks. It does not like this opening for roughly the same reasons I don't think it's good.
"As ChessGPT, I must say that 1. e4 e5 2. g4, commonly known as the Grob's Attack, is generally not considered a strong opening by most chess players and theorists.
While the move 1.e4 is a strong opening move that controls the center and develops the king's pawn, the move 2.g4 neglects the principles of chess opening strategy.
By advancing the g-pawn so early, White creates weaknesses in their own position, such as weakening the king's position and leaving the f3-square undefended. Black can often exploit these weaknesses by developing their pieces quickly and seizing control of the center.
Furthermore, the Grob's Attack does not put any immediate pressure on Black's position, and it allows Black to gain a lead in development by responding with moves such as Nc6, d5 or Bc5.
Therefore, while 1.e4 is a strong opening move, 2.g4 is considered to be a dubious move that does not conform to the principles of sound chess strategy."
ChatGPT confused 1.e4 e5 2.g4 with the grob, which is 1.g4.
1) the beginners thread must be visited by people trying to help them, for obvious reasons
2) g4 just... breaks all the rules
black is playing white basically, but its even better because of the weak pawn
and any Bg2 ideas are blocked by the e pawn
just play 1)g4 that makes more sense
and if you want the g pawn to be protected, go g4 then e3 so a bishop on g2 has the diagonal
btw, g4 and e3 g4 arent that good and i have just proved why e4 g4 is worse than both of them
also
look at your f3 square
tell me what pawn you will use to defend it
thats right, none of them
and same for the h3 square
and the f4 square
and the h4 square
squares like these are called weaknesses, and skilled players can exploit them
so why create literally four of them by the second move
AND your king will be very unsafe if you castle kingside, and castling queenside is a remote possibility
and besides, if e4 g4 has aggressive ideas, then why on move 2
do this stuff when there is a target (a king on g8) and you have developed properly
of course everything is playable at low levels
but still, why handicap yourself
Why does g4 break all the rules? Do you mean opening principles?
yes i do mean opening principles and also read my post more clearly, it has the answer why
Why would black be playing as white in this opening?
basically, by playing a move without much clear purpose (here i ask YOU what you want to do with 2.g4) black now can do basically whatever he wants
e4 e5 g4 d5 is like e4 e5 d4 for white, but better because of all the reasons why g4 is weakening
Why would the king be unsafe if the king was to castle?
um, i dont know, maybe the pawn on g2 is now on g4, and if it is taken the king on g1 will be exposed to attacks?
like through the g file
while normally the opponent has to work to remove the kings pawn cover, with 2g4 white is helping black to attack white
or you can castle queenside, but that will take some time to do properly
and then by that time your king is probably attacked in the center anyway
and that assumes the game will be open
but the game really cant be closed by white, can it?
1) the beginners thread must be visited by people trying to help them, for obvious reasons
2) g4 just... breaks all the rules
black is playing white basically, but its even better because of the weak pawn
and any Bg2 ideas are blocked by the e pawn
just play 1)g4 that makes more sense
and if you want the g pawn to be protected, go g4 then e3 so a bishop on g2 has the diagonal
btw, g4 and e3 g4 arent that good and i have just proved why e4 g4 is worse than both of them
also
look at your f3 square
tell me what pawn you will use to defend it
thats right, none of them
and same for the h3 square
and the f4 square
and the h4 square
squares like these are called weaknesses, and skilled players can exploit them
so why create literally four of them by the second move
AND your king will be very unsafe if you castle kingside, and castling queenside is a remote possibility
and besides, if e4 g4 has aggressive ideas, then why on move 2
do this stuff when there is a target (a king on g8) and you have developed properly
of course everything is playable at low levels
but still, why handicap yourself
Why does g4 break all the rules? Do you mean opening principles?
yes i do mean opening principles and also read my post more clearly, it has the answer why
Why would black be playing as white in this opening?
basically, by playing a move without much clear purpose (here i ask YOU what you want to do with 2.g4) black now can do basically whatever he wants
e4 e5 g4 d5 is like e4 e5 d4 for white, but better because of all the reasons why g4 is weakening
Why would the king be unsafe if the king was to castle?
um, i dont know, maybe the pawn on g2 is now on g4, and if it is taken the king on g1 will be exposed to attacks?
like through the g file
while normally the opponent has to work to remove the kings pawn cover, with 2g4 white is helping black to attack white
or you can castle queenside, but that will take some time to do properly
and then by that time your king is probably attacked in the center anyway
and that assumes the game will be open
but the game really cant be closed by white, can it?
What is the best response to 2.g4 for black? What should blacks second move be in order to avoid throwing away blacks advantage.
1) the beginners thread must be visited by people trying to help them, for obvious reasons
2) g4 just... breaks all the rules
black is playing white basically, but its even better because of the weak pawn
and any Bg2 ideas are blocked by the e pawn
just play 1)g4 that makes more sense
and if you want the g pawn to be protected, go g4 then e3 so a bishop on g2 has the diagonal
btw, g4 and e3 g4 arent that good and i have just proved why e4 g4 is worse than both of them
also
look at your f3 square
tell me what pawn you will use to defend it
thats right, none of them
and same for the h3 square
and the f4 square
and the h4 square
squares like these are called weaknesses, and skilled players can exploit them
so why create literally four of them by the second move
AND your king will be very unsafe if you castle kingside, and castling queenside is a remote possibility
and besides, if e4 g4 has aggressive ideas, then why on move 2
do this stuff when there is a target (a king on g8) and you have developed properly
of course everything is playable at low levels
but still, why handicap yourself
Why does g4 break all the rules? Do you mean opening principles?
yes i do mean opening principles and also read my post more clearly, it has the answer why
Why would black be playing as white in this opening?
basically, by playing a move without much clear purpose (here i ask YOU what you want to do with 2.g4) black now can do basically whatever he wants
e4 e5 g4 d5 is like e4 e5 d4 for white, but better because of all the reasons why g4 is weakening
Why would the king be unsafe if the king was to castle?
um, i dont know, maybe the pawn on g2 is now on g4, and if it is taken the king on g1 will be exposed to attacks?
like through the g file
while normally the opponent has to work to remove the kings pawn cover, with 2g4 white is helping black to attack white
or you can castle queenside, but that will take some time to do properly
and then by that time your king is probably attacked in the center anyway
and that assumes the game will be open
but the game really cant be closed by white, can it?
What is the best response to 2.g4 for black? What should blacks second move be in order to avoid throwing away blacks advantage.
i would say mostly any reasonable developing move (Nf6,d6,Bc5,Nc6) is good but like others said d5 is the best
I love chocolate wafers
yup same
1) the beginners thread must be visited by people trying to help them, for obvious reasons
2) g4 just... breaks all the rules
black is playing white basically, but its even better because of the weak pawn
and any Bg2 ideas are blocked by the e pawn
just play 1)g4 that makes more sense
and if you want the g pawn to be protected, go g4 then e3 so a bishop on g2 has the diagonal
btw, g4 and e3 g4 arent that good and i have just proved why e4 g4 is worse than both of them
also
look at your f3 square
tell me what pawn you will use to defend it
thats right, none of them
and same for the h3 square
and the f4 square
and the h4 square
squares like these are called weaknesses, and skilled players can exploit them
so why create literally four of them by the second move
AND your king will be very unsafe if you castle kingside, and castling queenside is a remote possibility
and besides, if e4 g4 has aggressive ideas, then why on move 2
do this stuff when there is a target (a king on g8) and you have developed properly
of course everything is playable at low levels
but still, why handicap yourself
Why does g4 break all the rules? Do you mean opening principles?
yes i do mean opening principles and also read my post more clearly, it has the answer why
Why would black be playing as white in this opening?
basically, by playing a move without much clear purpose (here i ask YOU what you want to do with 2.g4) black now can do basically whatever he wants
e4 e5 g4 d5 is like e4 e5 d4 for white, but better because of all the reasons why g4 is weakening
Why would the king be unsafe if the king was to castle?
um, i dont know, maybe the pawn on g2 is now on g4, and if it is taken the king on g1 will be exposed to attacks?
like through the g file
while normally the opponent has to work to remove the kings pawn cover, with 2g4 white is helping black to attack white
or you can castle queenside, but that will take some time to do properly
and then by that time your king is probably attacked in the center anyway
and that assumes the game will be open
but the game really cant be closed by white, can it?
What is the best response to 2.g4 for black? What should blacks second move be in order to avoid throwing away blacks advantage.
i would say mostly any reasonable developing move (Nf6,d6,Bc5,Nc6) is good but like others said d5 is the best
Can this be made into a suitable gambit for white or is it completely lost?
you see, gambits are about getting something else FOR the material
like an attack, positional stuff...
white has nothing there
if you want to play chess down a pawn, fine
but black can go like f5 Nf6 develop the other 2 pieces castle queenside then is just better
add g6 bg7 to that and the semi open g file has nothing for white
not to forget the threats involving Bf3
g4 has ideas of pushing g5 to attack the knight on f6 but if black avoids that with h6 or Nge7 then its bad
you see, gambits are about getting something else FOR the material
like an attack, positional stuff...
white has nothing there
if you want to play chess down a pawn, fine
but black can go like f5 Nf6 develop the other 2 pieces castle queenside then is just better
add g6 bg7 to that and the semi open g file has nothing for white
not to forget the threats involving Bf3
White has a rook that can be placed on the g-file very easily.
I would say it is not a terrible opening but there is better. f4 weakens the kingside, doesn't take control of the center, and is not doing anything obvious that is good. For further explanation and insight put, it into an engine.