< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 15 ·
|Mar-30-04|| ||Kenkaku: Anyone who's familiar with the white side of the Sicilian should be more than happy to take it up should white voluntarily take the black pieces, for all intents and purposes, in a game. |
|Apr-11-04|| ||Calchexas: About the 1.g4 Nf6 2.g5 line: I've discovered (through long thought and a little computer analysis) that most lines are playable after 2. ...Nd5. (3.c4 Nb4; 3.e4 Nb6; 3.Bg2 Nf4) I'm still not sure, however, whether 3.d4 d6 works for Black.|
I thought up the line on my own just a couple days ago. I really do think it works.
|May-01-04|| ||chessplayermatthew: 1.c3 e5 2.c4 is not likely if black chouses something else then e5 or d5 then how do you play is EX. c3 and then Nf6 or Nc6 know how do you play |
|May-02-04|| ||AgentRgent: <Calchexas: 1.g4 Nf6 2.g5 line: I thought up the line on my own just a couple days ago. I really do think it works.> Look a little farther down the posting list. I've discussed this line quite a bit. But after my research (and computer analysis) I didn't find it any of the lines after 2. g5 very convincing. EXCEPT for 2...Nh6 and 2...Ng8!? (my choice). I suggest you let your computer go a little further into the lines after 2...Nd5, I found white to have a fairly large advantage in space and initiative in them. While I don't mind giving space to white (I play Alekhine's Defense), I never got anything near a satisfactory game with anything other than 2...Ng8!? But I did manage to win a tournament game with that. |
|May-22-04|| ||get Reti: They should make a name for the opening 1. g3 |
|May-22-04|| ||Dillinger: 1.g3 is the Benko opening, although John Watson insists that it should only be called such if followed by Nf3 and c4 and opposed by ...d5. |
|Jun-19-04|| ||MatrixManNe0: Hey, I was thinking of playing the St. George Defense (1. e4 a6!?) as black. The opening isn't played much, and black seems to lose quite often, however, I believe that the entire point of this opening is like the Alekhine's Defense, where white builds a strong centre only to be destroyed by black's superior development (which is so after 2. d4 b5, where if Nc3, then ...b4, while black fianchettos the queen's bishop).|
If you're asking why I would play such an odd opening, it is because I can find no suitable gambit to the 1. e4. If one would recommend such a gambit against 1. e4, it would be greatly appreciated!
|Aug-03-04|| ||shr0pshire: Has anyone else played the drunken king against strong competition in traditional time control? |
I have played this a few times against pretty strong competition (against class A players and experts).
I haven't lost with it yet, and I have played five games with it. 2-0-3.
I think that it is a lot stronger than most give it credit for. I am going to go out on a limb and call it as positionally strong as the Bird.
Does anyone have any drunken king games?
Here are two fun ones in the database. Enjoy, my treat!
S Williams vs M Simons, 1999
Fine vs J Rappaport, 1931
|Aug-03-04|| ||BiLL RobeRTiE: I'd like to see a game featuring 1 f3, particularly one where White wins, dissected Silman-style, mostly to see where Black goes wrong. Of course playing 'The Drunken King' hands somewhat of an advantage to Black for the first few moves, but this of course can fizzle. I suppose one could say that playing 1 f3 as White is somewhat like playing Black.
Of course, there are worse ways to begin a chess game - at the Washington State Team High School Chess Championships, a teammate of mine faced as White the fearsome ...d6, ...c6, ...Kd7-c7 system! Now that is a good way to give yourself a losing position, especially when your opponent is rated 500 points higher than you! :) |
|Aug-03-04|| ||acirce: When I was a kid I once won a whole tournament exclusively playing 1.f3 2.Kf2 and the equivalent as Black. |
|Aug-03-04|| ||Lawrence: <acirce>, serendipity, that's what it is. The same day you post your 1.f3 2.Kf2, <Dick Brain> posts an interesting interview with Genrikh Chepukaitis who in his first game plays 4.f3 and 7.Kf2, and explains why.|
|Aug-03-04|| ||shr0pshire: I will see if I can dig up some of my games, and post them, and analyze them. They tend to be very positional games from my experience. Which I think is a fun thing to spring on your opponent! |
|Sep-04-04|| ||RubyDragon: <shr0pshire>, I thought it was called the "Fred", not the "drunken king"? Oh well, it's great whatever it's called! |
|Sep-04-04|| ||pawn52: <acirce> Why even bother playing 1.f3 2.f2? All the benefits out of those two moves wll go to Black because you wold have an exposed king at that point. Not to mention the fact that you forfeit your right to castle. And how did you win a whole tournament just by playing those two opening moves? |
|Sep-04-04|| ||acirce: <pawn52> The disadvantages are quite self-evident.. I was so superior to the other people in my age and area that I wanted to try that for fun. I realize that it probably did seem a little arrogant! :-) I didn't win all the games but I won the tournament. I might have been 12 or something. |
|Sep-04-04|| ||pawn52: <acirce> <I was so superior to the other people in my age and area that I wanted to try that for fun> Who wouldn't? I'd pull an experiment or two on the board during a tournament if I'm better than the other players. |
|Sep-05-04|| ||RisingChamp: Acirce> Its really nice to hear that you have played stuff that isnt mainline theory.Though I myself am not a fan of the mighty 1f3 2 kf2 system.(I am not being sarcastic) |
|Sep-05-04|| ||RisingChamp: To clarify I am sarcastic abt the strength of the opening but not abt u playing it. |
|Sep-05-04|| ||Leviathan: Do the 1.e3 and 1.d3 openings have a name? |
|Sep-05-04|| ||MoonlitKnight: I hate those arrogant little 12 year old bastards who beat me all the time! :) |
|Sep-06-04|| ||Leviathan: A summary of all white's "uncommon" 1st moves, with examples:|
1.a4 - Ware opening (P Ware vs E Delmar, 1880)
1.a3 - Anderssen opening (Adolf Anderssen vs Morphy, 1858)
1.b4 - Sokolskij opening (Tartakower vs Colle, 1926)
1.b3 - Nimzo-Larsen attack (Larsen vs Judit Polgar, 1992)
1.c3 - Saragossa opening (Tartakower vs Reti, 1925)
1.f3 - Barnes(?) opening (S Williams vs M Simons, 1999)
1.g3 - Benkö opening (Suttles vs Miles, 1981)
1.g4 - Grob opening (M Basman vs Nunn, 1978)
1.h3 - Clemens(?) opening (M Basman vs Daly, 1990)
1.h4 - Desprez(?) opening (Bogoljubov vs Schuppler, 1949)
1.Na3 - Durkin's attack (G Minchev vs O Santana, 1987)
1.Nc3 - Van Geet(?) op. (Bogoljubov vs N Zubarev, 1925)
1.Nh3 - Amar(?) opening (L Boeye vs E Denayer, 2001)
|Sep-06-04|| ||RisingChamp: Well 1.Nc3 I have heard as Dunst opening.It isnt so bad quite a few GMs have played.As for b3 I am surprised to see it included because it is hardly uncommon in the sense that f3 h3 etc are.g3 is also perfectly normal transpositional device. |
|Sep-06-04|| ||Leviathan: <RC>It was a difficut choice, but I finally decided to include 1.b3 for two reasons:|
1)It is still considered "half-uncommon" :) - just look at the top of this page <1.a3,b3,d3,g4, etc>
2)I love that Larsen vs Polgar game!! :)
|Sep-06-04|| ||benderules: Really 1.b3 Nimzovich-Larsen opening is not A00, it´s A01. Fischer played it some time, and its interestng cos Bobby doesnt play stupid openings |
|Sep-06-04|| ||Giancarlo: <Benderules> your correct, 1.b3 is not considered un-common. It's A01. Nimzo-Larsen attack. What's intresting is that in the opening explorer, 1.g3 is played more often the 1.b3, yet 1.g3 is considered un-common and 1.b3 isn't. |
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 15 ·