chess opening e4 e5 g3

I have recently taken it up and works for me. I'm going to play in a tournament tonight and I'm thinking about playing it even if black doesn't play e5. I can still play it against openings such as the Sicilian. What do you guys think of g3?

Originally posted by Swordchess
I have recently taken it up and works for me. I'm going to play in a tournament tonight and I'm thinking about playing it even if black doesn't play e5. I can still play it against openings such as the Sicilian. What do you guys think of g3?

Probably transposes into a Closed Sicilian against 1...c5. I don't think 1. e4 e5 2. g3?! is a bad opening per se, but it seems to concede equality to Black pretty easily.

You could consider trying something like the Bishop opening or the Ponziani, if you're trying to sidestep the Ruy Lopez and the Giuoco Piano.

Originally posted by EinZweiDrei
Probably transposes into a Closed Sicilian against 1...c5. I don't think 1. e4 e5 2. g3?! is a bad opening per se, but it seems to concede equality to Black pretty easily.

You could consider trying something like the Bishop opening or the Ponziani, if you're trying to sidestep the Ruy Lopez and the Giuoco Piano.

NO! don't try the bishop opening if you aren't ready.... 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 f5!? is very tough for white to figure out over the board.

2.g3 gives Black a very easy game, there are
better moves in the position. 2.Nf3 is not bad.

1 e4 e5 2.Nc3 (the Vienna) and then g3 is playable.
The point of 2.Nc3 is to hold back d5 which 2.g3 encourages.

Let the current No1 player on the site show you.

Surtism - skeeter RHP 2008

Originally posted by greenpawn34
2.g3 gives Black a very easy game, there are
better moves in the position. 2.Nf3 is not bad.

1 e4 e5 2.Nc3 (the Vienna) and then g3 is playable.
The point of 2.Nc3 is to hold back d5 which 2.g3 encourages.

Let the current No1 player on the site show you.

Surtism - skeeter RHP 2008

[pgn]
[Event "Challenge"]
[Site "http://www.redhotpawn.com ...[text shortened]... ned there, he is gets mated or loses a chess set in material.} [/pgn]

Well you can chalk that one up to the fact that skeeter is more than double Surtism's rating.

Originally posted by tomtom232
Well you can chalk that one up to the fact that skeeter is more than double Surtism's rating.

Yep, it's amazing how bad an opening can look when someone plays it poorly.

For instance, white did not have to recapture the pawn on e4 right away. I'm sure there were better options.

It seems to me that this system is simply a variation of the KIA, which is very playable, even if people think it's a bit passive.

Originally posted by Swordchess
I have recently taken it up and works for me. I'm going to play in a tournament tonight and I'm thinking about playing it even if black doesn't play e5. I can still play it against openings such as the Sicilian. What do you guys think of g3?

2.g3 is weak in my feeble opinion. But play your preference.

The person who played that opening is inexpierienced. We should have a master play that opening and see how it turns out.

Originally posted by moon1969
2.g3 is weak in my feeble opinion. But play your preference.

Play your preference is what I say too. Chess is supposed to be about having fun. If there is something fundamentally flawed about it, then don't play it.

If you continue to play, then a few years later you'll be playing something else. Perhaps there is something to be learned by playing inferior openings. Perhaps one of those things is why it is inferior.

Originally posted by Swordchess
I have recently taken it up and works for me. I'm going to play in a tournament tonight and I'm thinking about playing it even if black doesn't play e5. I can still play it against openings such as the Sicilian. What do you guys think of g3?

I play 1. g3 and can honestly say that a pawn on e4 is just going to get in the way. 1. c4 then 2. g3 is fine, 1. Nf3 followed by g3 at some point also fine, even 1. d4 and g3 going for a Catalan is OK if you like that sort of thing. The only reason to play g3 is to plonk a bishop on g2 to fire down the long diagonal. A pawn on e4 just obstructs that line of fire. If you must play 1. e4 then put the bishop on c4 or b5 where it belongs.

Originally posted by Swordchess
I have recently taken it up and works for me. I'm going to play in a tournament tonight and I'm thinking about playing it even if black doesn't play e5. I can still play it against openings such as the Sicilian. What do you guys think of g3?

I need to look up the exact reference, but I believe in Alekhine's "My Best Games of Chess" he makes reference to g3 being a poor move in almost all open games. It seems like you just make a potential bad bishop out of the gate.

"The person who played that opening is inexpierienced.
We should have a master play that opening and see how it turns out."

Since you as the poster are graded 1200 and I have no idea how good you are
I gave an 1158 player's game as an example of what can happen.

You have a few GIP's with it but none have really tested the 1.e4 e5 2.g3 idea.

You say you are off to try it tonight in a tournament.
You are a subscirber, I like to help out subs if I can.

So only going on what I can see I chipped in.
If the advice is way beneath you then no harm done.

Finding a master game after 1.e4 e5 2.g3 d5 may also be quite hard.
I cannot find any.

A few with 1.e4 e5 2.g3 (Tartakower (twice) and Benko (once) but nobody
played 2...d5 which I think is the best move and the one I was warning you against.

Good Luck. I won't be bothering you again.

Originally posted by Swordchess
I have recently taken it up and works for me. I'm going to play in a tournament tonight and I'm thinking about playing it even if black doesn't play e5. I can still play it against openings such as the Sicilian. What do you guys think of g3?

I like my bishop on g2/g7 and get similar games with white and black (so no theory for me to learn)

However blocking in your "good" bishop with e4(/e5) seems madness,

If you like that sort of thing take a look at the Reti Opening (and possibly Pirc Defence)

Originally posted by Swordchess
I have recently taken it up and works for me. I'm going to play in a tournament tonight and I'm thinking about playing it even if black doesn't play e5. I can still play it against openings such as the Sicilian. What do you guys think of g3?

I am a longtime KIA player from the 1. g3 or the 1. Nf3 move order, and occasionally from 1. e4 transposing, and I love to fianchetto on the kingside with both colors, but I am not a big fan of e4 and g3 together in the first two moves.

There is no opening that is fabulous against every conceivable defense, and combining e4 and g3 so early is very committal, and makes it easy for a good opponent to cherry-pick his response.

If I play 1. g3, I prefer to wait and let black play a few of his cards on the table, as I could later play c4, d4, e4, or even f4 to maximize my chances against whatever black shows me.

With the 1. e4 e5 2. g3 move order, usually black can play an early ...d5 and get a good game with easy development of his pieces.

GP's example is right on the money, and more importantly, it is thematic- it is entirely reasonable to expect to see a typical club player play 2. ... d5 without thinking much about it.

Of course, it's also very possible that the typical 1. ... e5 player is going to see 2. g3 and think "I'm just going to play 2. ... Nf6 with a probable transposition to a Vienna, and if he plays anything else, I'm just going to see what white's avoiding 3. Nc3 will give me."

That said, if the idea appeals to you, play it and have fun. Win or lose, you will learn from the experience!