Barnes is only correct if followed up by 2.g4 especially in response to 1...e6 or 1...e5
I disagree. I'm particularly fond of this variation:
https://www.chess.com/opening/eco/A00_Barnes_Opening_1...e5_2.g4
I personally prefer the Grob-like 2.g4 in response to Black playing From's Gambit against Bird's opening: 1.f4 e5
Annnnd then... 2... Qh4#.
Do you have a penchant for belaboring the obvioius?
Barnes is only correct if followed up by 2.g4 especially in response to 1...e6 or 1...e5
I disagree. I'm particularly fond of this variation:
https://www.chess.com/opening/eco/A00_Barnes_Opening_1...e5_2.g4
I personally prefer the Grob-like 2.g4 in response to Black playing From's Gambit against Bird's opening: 1.f4 e5
Annnnd then... 2... Qh4#.
Do you have a penchant for belaboring the obvioius?
Yes because so many people don't see and even deny the obvious.
White can hope for a slight disadvantage at best, and that's if you are an engine. The practical chances for this opening in real OTB games are awful. I would not even take it up as a surprise weapon.
To qualify as a surprise weapon, it would have to be a weapon first, and to be a weapon it would have to be threatening in some way 
White can hope for a slight disadvantage at best, and that's if you are an engine. The practical chances for this opening in real OTB games are awful. I would not even take it up as a surprise weapon.
To qualify as a surprise weapon, it would have to be a weapon first, and to be a weapon it would have to be threatening in some way
I'm sure the Queen is just terrified of the enemy King approaching her alone and unarmed.
Barnes is only correct if followed up by 2.g4 especially in response to 1...e6 or 1...e5
I disagree. I'm particularly fond of this variation:
https://www.chess.com/opening/eco/A00_Barnes_Opening_1...e5_2.g4
I personally prefer the Grob-like 2.g4 in response to Black playing From's Gambit against Bird's opening: 1.f4 e5
Annnnd then... 2... Qh4#.