The post that was quoted here has been removedThe only move that probably actually is bad is 1. f3, and it's a total nightmare if someone plays it against you as there is no good result - a win is to be expected and any other result leaves you looking foolish: Game 2809197
Originally posted by DeepThoughtThat's partly your fault for getting into some kind of reversed French in which f2-f3 actually made sense. 😛
The only move that probably actually is bad is 1. f3, and it's a total nightmare if someone plays it against you as there is no good result - a win is to be expected and any other result leaves you looking foolish: Game 2809197
Originally posted by English TalThe bishops game is a solid opening. I prefer 2... Nf6 against it but it is complex and can easily transpose into a two knights/fried liver game. there is a class A player at my club who plays it all the time with great success.
There is nothing wrong whatsoever with 2. Bc4,..... but in the context of going for a quick mate I agree with you.
(John Nunn, then British Champ, played me once in a simul using this and talking afterwards suggested 2.Bc4 was most underrrated. I guess this still remains so....)
Originally posted by English TalClassical opening theory would suggest that it is better to bring the knights out before bishops, but I would agree that 2.Bc4 in a double-kingpawn game is fairly sound and safe, and has potential for fairly powerful play.
There is nothing wrong whatsoever with 2. Bc4,..... but in the context of going for a quick mate I agree with you.
(John Nunn, then British Champ, played me once in a simul using this and talking afterwards suggested 2.Bc4 was most underrrated. I guess this still remains so....)
I mention it, because when I see it played, I'm on the lookout for an early queen sortie, and usually reply with Nc6. In my experience, however, it's more common for people trying for the "four-mover" mate to move the queen out first, which I believe to be a blunder.
In the trenches most openings are playable. I do surprisingly well with the St George. Both in casual OTB and on the internet. I know absolutely nothing about the theory of the opening however. In corr you're far less likely to get away with anything too unsound. I wouldn't try the Omega for example.
Originally posted by KorchThank you!
I would recommend not to be arrogant against opening which you dont understand. I mean not only unortodoux openings like Grob (1.g4) or Latvians gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5), but also some classics openings (like French) which some people misunderstands, showing their arrogance and ignorance. ðŸ˜
Originally posted by DeepThoughtThere is nothing wrong with f3...I know of a few good players who played it, and with success too!
The only move that probably actually is bad is 1. f3, and it's a total nightmare if someone plays it against you as there is no good result - a win is to be expected and any other result leaves you looking foolish: Game 2809197