Isnt playing 1.a3 good?

Doesnt playing 1.a3 reverse colours as long as black doesnt try 1...a6 or h6? So wouldnt it cut down the time a player needs to spend studying lines as white as he could play whatever he plays as black after the change of tempo? So doesnt 1.a3 mean more time for studying middlegame and endgame?

1.a3 "is played by lazy people" by GM Roman in Romans lab

 

basically the anderssen's opening can be played by some one who is good at defence, but saying this will lead you in to the middle game quicker you are mistaken as this line is there in theory if i am not mistaken.

so in almost all variations black is better according to stockfish 6. but practically if black looses initiative white can pull a fast win.

this oopening violates opening principles to the root.

I would only play it for fun in blitz or bullet. I wouldn't build my whole opening repertoire around it though... But that's just my two cents worth. Who cares what I think anyway, just play the way you want and try and learn from your own mistakes and see where that gets you... I'm playing a little devils advocate, but it's really up to you if you want to violate classical chess principles. I would much rather play the hippo if I was you as both white and black if I wanted to be lazy like that, but I think the better choice would be to follow classical chess principles, then after you master those, learn off beat lines like a3, or the hippo with both colors. That's coming from the book of fundamental chess openings, the going go to book on chess openings for the amateur player. In that book you can read the pros and cons of all the openings.

@Dr Not Nyc, Im not refering to the theoy of anderssons opening. After 1.a3 isnt it just the same as playing as black? Eg 1.a3 e5 2.e3 d5 3.d4 Nc6 4. Nf3 Bg4 5. Be2 e4 and its just a french defense classical with colors reversed. If black tries 1...d5 I play a QGD with colours reversed under the same logic. How does this idea violate any opening principle? Im just playing what I play as black. Definitely the QGD doesnt violate opening principles to the root does it?

a3 is fine for non GMs. It's flexible and gives you a lot of options, but interestingly enough, doesn't totally get black out of book as black can often play standard central-control lines without having any problems.

 

SO while it's not outright losing for non GMs, it does give up white's first  move advantage to press black into a problematic position - black gets comfortable development after a3.

Yeah, it's a super amazing move.

Only problem is the brilliant reply 1...a6!

No. The rook pawn move is a theoretical and important move in tons of openings. Other times the move isn't important and yes, you're basically playing black. So it just depends on what's played.

Both the French and QGD have variations where black plays a6. So you'll be able to get those positions a tempo up (which can be either good or bad, also depending on the position).

Other times the move may simply weaken your queenside.

The point is that you want to get more out of the opening as White. Lars Schandorff has compared playing White to serving at tennis: Either you win directly with an ace or, if your opponent manages to return the ball, you get to dictate the rest of the duel.

That said, 1.a3 cuts out any of your favourite defences where you put a piece on a6 (like many lines of the KID or the MB, or the QID for example).

Ahhh GM Yuri has become aware of this thread!

Sorry HolyKing, but I'm afraid you can forget about serious answers here now.

Thank you guys for the feedback. Guess I should play the regular openings as white too. Maybe Id miss out on a lot of positions if I play what I play as black itself. Thank you.

yes once in a while you must play something out of this world, tactical openings are nice,

 

I am not a strong player but i cann play 1.g4 against a player with a 100 rating points above mine and i can hold my own and even win. a3 is strong dpnding on ur ideas

1 e4 e5 2 a3 is more correct, now black can`t play reversed ruy lopez.

@EarlPurple, the real intention of 1.a3 is not to control b4 or prevent pin by bishop,etc though those are effects of the move. Why I considered playing 1.a3 was just to waste a tempo and end up playing as black even when I start as white cutting down the theory.

So after 1....c5, I just play what I usually play against the English opening as black, with colours reversed. See post #4 for what I mean.

@caezx, that was the inspiration.

I wouldn't have thought it necessary to explain this, but the equivalent of an ace is an easy win where Black has never had a chance to reach equality at all.

This happens more often when you play White, as moving first matters.