It seems that some like to play 2.Bc4 and 2.f5. I don't mean Sicilian.
I played a couple of 2. f5. And no sweat, they resigned before reaching 30 moves. You see, that I seldom do 1. e4, so I seldom play Sicilian as white.
I didn't even care to look at game explorer. I know somehow I will exploit the weakness either move 10, 20, or 50.
They fight in their own style. I don't mind at all.
The problem in your game was 17...Bg5 allowing white to build a strong initiative and force weaknesses in your position to avoid a forced loss of material or checkmate, and the last move of the game white wins material no matter what. The problem wasn't the opening but simple tactical oversites. Although white was doing better 17...Bxd5 and now only one knight converges on e7.
Knights working together on f5 and d5 are a powerful thing.
As for irregular openings most just forfeit the opening advantage, but are likely equal right from the start. The Grob, while positionally suspect, should draw by force like any other opening, but black doesn't need to fight nearly as hard for said equality. 1.d4 and 1.e4 make black work to equalize.
i mean i hate it everytime i play the sicilian and the fool plays 2.Bc4
Why are they not fighting?
I just like to set up with e6 and then strike with ...d5 eventually in the 2.Bc4 variations.
i just hate it when players play bad moves IN THE OPENINGS. It doesn't give me any satisfaction to win from an opening advantage. It's just not worth my time.
Lol. But you were completely outplayed by a player with a bad opening...
I get it though; you are not being serious.
The relative value of the opening is irrelevant. What actually matters is the fact that you're losing to them. You can call them crap all you want but at the end of the day said crap is getting the job done and your theoretical superiority is about as useful as wet tissue paper. Instead of getting irritated at the opening try and figure out what White is trying to do in the opening and respond to it with a clear head. Use the main ideas of the opening to help you find good moves. If you can maybe you equalise out of the opening. But even after that you still have a game to play.
And not wanting to play when the opening doesn't go a certain way is also odd. The opening is just one phase of the game. The point of the opening is to get to the middlegame and you are supposedly getting good ones so theoretically there should be no problem. Maybe you are putting way too much emphasis on the opening stage. Are you sure this isn't just an issue of being unfamiliar with the positions you get when White leaves the boo
pdve_. one solution to getting aggravated at bad opening moves, giving you an advantage is: make a couple of bad moves yourself....get you and your opponent back on level ground. I've seen so many great replies to this thres...keep it up....K. Sergey, cabbagecrates and numerous others....You make this chess-site even more enjoyable!!
Also beware of facing certain openings like the Budapest where seemingly sensible moves can get you in trouble. I personally don't like playing against the Grob because it makes Nf6 a silly move because of g5, and if I take the pawn the rook has a line of attack to the kingside. The best one can do is learn how to play against such things, occupy the center and develop sensibly, though the downside is by doing so you'll be playing into their book.
TitanCG +10
i try and work hard on my chess. i go through middlegame books and try and understand the nuances of most openings. then when somebody play 1.e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4. Qxd4?! then I get disgusted and want to resign in disgust.
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1699951
Yeah I was about to say that Carlsen, Polgar etc have played that terrible opening.
Also, Karpov, Tal, Short, Yusupov, but they weren't much good.
Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dee they're throwing knives into the tree
because you can ALWAYS convert an opening advantage! maybe watching too many GM games gave you the wrong impression.
4. Qxd4 is a move i really like myself.
i try and work hard on my chess. i go through middlegame books and try and understand the nuances of most openings. then when somebody play 1.e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4. Qxd4?! then I get disgusted and want to resign in disgust.
That is a legit variation, played at the top level. I watched a video where Magnus played it.
i mean i hate it everytime i play the sicilian and the fool plays 2.Bc4
Why are they not fighting?
Joel Benjamin wants to have a word with you.
I guess this is how Kramnik beat Kasparov. Kasparov was probably so disgusted to play against the Berlin Wall that he preferred to lose the match.
I dont know a great deal of openings, I go on what I feel is right after considering the options.
Here is a perfect example of the OP's point. Black players here shun the mainline ....Nf6, even though it gains a tempo attacking the queen, and deviate with sideline moves like ...Qe7 or ...Qf6. Just to annoy white.
Of course, I can win against these too. But chess would be so much better if these players would stick to well known theory!
i mean i hate it everytime i play the sicilian and the fool plays 2.Bc4
Why are they not fighting?
sometimes people lost very often, they had chances to win and had hope and at the end they lost even more. They probably think they lose anyway and fighting just makes them lose more, because they get dissapointed even more.
that being said i dont know if bc4 is bad or not.