Originally posted by Sicilian SmaugI don't like it, because it just doesn't feel like a true King's Gambit. Chessville goes so far as to call it an "improved" version of the KG, but I really don't agree with this. It just seems less exciting, less sharp, and not the same as a King's Gambit.
Why what, Bendeco.
Reply and quote.
Originally posted by Sicilian SmaugIt's bad because white is supposed to take charge as white moves first
It's bad because white is supposed to take charge as white moves first
1.c3 does not take charge, it hands the initiative to black. Why do that?
1.c3 is a patzer opening. Fullstop (Period, if you're American 😉)
thats not true at all, you can prepare to attack the middle and not have to attack it immediately.
Originally posted by EcstremeVenomEcstreme, that's possible, with ideas like the Reti opening. However, 1.c3 is just a bad move. To prove this fact just take a look in the opening explorer at chessgames.com There are literally hundreds of thousands of games there, and 1.c3 has been play a whopping 70 times. The scores for 1.c3 are as follows
[b]It's bad because white is supposed to take charge as white moves first
thats not true at all, you can prepare to attack the middle and not have to attack it immediately.[/b]
W D L
34.3% 28.6% 37.1%
What's this tell you?