Merits of 1.c3 revisited

Originally posted by Habeascorp
My faith in c3 restored :-)

This thread seems to make the dutch more tempting than c3

Originally posted by Nowakowski
I didn't realise c3 was considered serious. I still don't seem to realize
it is serious. Its seriously, not considered serious.

[pgn][Event "Challenge"]
[Site "http://www.redhotpawn.com"]
[Date "2009.09.08"]
[EndDate "2009.09.11"]
[Round "?"]
[White ""]
[Black "Nowakowski"]
[WhiteRating "1407"]
[BlackRating "1785"]
[WhiteELO "1407"]
[Blac ...[text shortened]... 8. Rh1xh2 Nd3xc5 29. Kd2e1 Rd8d1
30. Ke1f2 Qg4f3 0-1[/pgn]

-GIN

I agree that it is a dubious move.

There are, however, players of my level who OTB gain a regular initial advantage by knowing their openings by book but without knowing openings as a conceptual art. I think c3 might initially offput a few of them. However, there are other players who will enjoy what is probably just a lost tempo.

How often is the expression 'play the man' true in chess?

c3, d3 and d4, and now, you got, a caro kann is black player e5 or a slav if black plays c5 and d5. you can even play a dutch from that.