Originally posted by robbie carrobie
[fen]rnbq1rk1/ppppbppp/5n2/4p3/1PP5/P3P1P1/3P1P1P/RNBQKBNR w KQ - 0 6[/fen]
five moves in and white has not developed one piece, dubious, such a clear violation of
chess principles should be rigorously punished, its the duty of all chess players to
punish such blatant disregard for the principles of chess!
I think Bent Larsen could play like this, but it's a lot tougher for we mortals. That said, I love the bold play.
One could also argue that moving pawns does develop pieces to an extent. The reason I mention it is that one time I read a Capablanca quote where he stated that giving pawn odds in a game isn't odds at all unless it involved the f-pawn, as giving up any other pawn constitutes a development advantage to the person with the missing pawn.
The idea is that a pawn missing from it's original square allows easier development for the pieces that can pass through the square that much easier.
The thought stuck with me because I was surprised to hear it from Capablanca, as I did not think he would consider the loss of a pawn in that way, but it's just another example of the well-rounded complexity of World Champions.