Playing an opening vs. someone who doesn't know anything about openings

Ok at low level there's no need to do a deep analysis up to move #30 or whatever on a specific opening or variation. But I'm sorry, if you're 1300+ (whatever) there is no excuse to at least know some basic opening moves ( the first 4 to 5 will do) on the opening that's being played.

Here's an example. The notorious Sicilian!,  and I'm Black.

1) e4, c5

2) Bc4?, e6

3) Nc6, Ne7

4) Nf3, d5

Takes, takes, followed by a pointless check with their bishop plus the dickhead amount of times it's been moved. I see this all the time!

This applies to other openings I play as well. Are people just too damn lazy to even consider a small handful of moves on an opening being played? I think in the long run the amount of random moves your opponent makes will make you become the bit more wiser in your opening repertoire for the future.

Does it hurt people that much to even consider what opening was just played?

it never ceases to amaze me that some folks think ignorance is an unforgivable sin. I'd say it's more like the normal condition with occasional exceptions. ;-)

Yes it seems like they are. Who exactly is the person in this scenerio that understands the opening?

Here is some free advice:

http://www.chess.com/blog/X_PLAYER_J_X/sicilian-defence

http://www.chess.com/blog/X_PLAYER_J_X/sicilian-defence-1

For someone who doesn't know anything about openings, White seems to be doing OK so far.

LOL

Are you serious!?

You're blog is exactly what I'm going on about! I see that all the time! Just noobs who want a quick a checkmate with no consideration that there's three part's to the game :)

I don't really think it's necessary to know even 4 moves for a1300+. If this must be studied, then they will not have that rating :) Seriously, y have seen very good players of 1900 that don't know theory for more than 5 moves, and they are really good for that level, with good results.

But you're predominantly a Blitz player here and I would imagine so are these 1900's that are in question.

I think you are missing the point.

The point I am making is there Bc4 move is bad because it can be open for tempo gains. Which will result in the bishop moving alot (wasting time).

If you allow them to do a bishop check than they are not really wasting alot of time with there bishop.

Which makes there Bc4 move more justified. If you are not punishing there move correctly how can you make fun of them. Frankly there move is doing great against you because they are doing bishop checks on you.

You play d5 hitting there bishop they play Bb5+ gaining back the lost tempo.

You need to play a6 or read my article I posted.

Maybe the reason you see alot of noobs playing Bc4 is because everyone who responses to them is letting them do the same bishop checking move you are letting them do. Making there position seem good.

So...?

No not really, because when they take that bishop in for the check (they've already moved x amount of times) I bring my bishop out (10/10) they'll exchange and I capture with my knight thus further development and tempo. At our level it doesn't matter but at top level it does.

Consider Nimzo Indian (I'm white) and play Kf3 instead of Kc3. It would be a mistake to check the king on their half. They're accelerating your development.

You missed my point entirely. That's a typical response I get to the Sicilian hence why I said it's notorious and the majority of players aren't even familiar with the first 4-5 moves of it.

Even Wiki' says Bc4 is a mistake.

After Bb5+

If you put your knight on c6 blocking the check. They damage your structure. Justifying there bishop move. Since it has left ruin pawn structure long term weakness

If you put your bishop on d7 to block the check. They will take your bishop. An no matter what piece you use to recapture. Your piece will be misplaced.

The queen does not belong on d7 which means you will have to move it again later on to a better square causing you to waste a tempo that you won making the tempos even again.

The knight does not belong on d7 because its best square is c6 which means you will have to move the knight again to a better square once again causing you to waste a tempo that you thought you won.

If you put your knight on Nd7 blocking the check. They have gotten you to move your knight once again to a bad square and there damage has been done.

In short you want to keep your tempo you gained you do not want them to get it back by misplacing your pieces or by ruining your structure.

Play the move a6 stopping Bb5 before you play d5. After you play a6 they do not have Bb5+ any longer which means when you play d5 to hit there bishop. They will have to retreat it. You will drive them backwards and not forwards.

Lol, I didn't know 2. Bc4 had a name!  The Bowlder Attack!  Awesome.  Cool material X_PLAYER_J_X!

True but black is will often play a6 to help support a b5 pawn push which is used in the queen side expansion.

This idea happens alot in the Sicilian Structure.

It is a dou purpose move which is completely useful. Even if the structure turns into the French Defense black should play on the queen side.

The only time black may not play on the queen side will be if white exchanges pawns on d5.

However, if he does than black position often equalizes.

This is the position we are talking about.

amilton542 moves at move 3 are wrong. Black can not make 2 moves at move 3.

Nc6 and Ne7 are illegal.

Which goes back to the point I am making.

a6 in this position is like Kan Sicilian.

I am actually fairly sure that while it's true that a lot of noobs go in Bc4 against the Sicilian, a lot of 1400+ (blitz rating, which on chess.com is stronger than 1400 slow-speed players by a fair amount) intentionally play Bc4 early to avoid theoretical lines in the Dragon,etc. where a prepared black player (like me) who likes the Dragon can sometimes outplay their ability thanks to book prep.

I'd venture that most 1200-1400s would actually fare a lot better playing the non-book Bc4 line than going head to head with any black player who can actually trot out a Dragon setup.

Even in that line you posted in your original post is definitely eminently playable for white. Stockfish gives white a half pawn bonus in that situation, but aside from engines, I've tried it myself and it's absolutely playable, with no crazy tricks required for white to maintain that small plus. (As opposed to something like Benoni, where you can really run into trouble as either color if you just 'play classically' and don't have specific counter lines memorized.)

EDIT - I just noticed that you were specifically referring to 2.Bc4; I should probably distinguish that from the Sicilian Sozin lines (after 2.Nf3) which I see a lot more.

I'm not ranting about how people play, it just amazes me that when people reach a certain level they haven't even spent so much as several minutes on a video or whatever on an opening.

And if you want to debate to me like that on a forum website give me what you got you little prick. You might think you're big and clever sat behind your computer monitor but I bet you wouldn't say boo to a goose in person, now jog on you nob head.

I still don't even know what the OP's 3rd move is.

Is he trying to say 3.Nc3?

No idea pure guessing game at this point.

Even if white plays 3.Nc3  responding with 3...Ne7 as black makes no sense?

How do you plan to develop the dark bishop?

I think white already has justification.

Black is putting the knight on g on the e7 square instead of f6 for no reason at all. Furthermore, black is also blocking the dark bishop once the knight goes to e7.

White can just play Be2 and smile.

How do I post a game that involves you watch by pressing the play button and I'll show you.