:)

I've always had excellent results with the Alekhine.

There's one way to play against it that always concerns me, and which I meet with trepidation, but fortunately most people don't play it.

In fact, most players below 2400 (and occasionally some above it) seem to have little idea how to play against this daringly hypermodern defense. Perhaps their problem is precisely that they listened to all the people who called it a forced loss and never bothered to study its real complexities, taking a "theoretical" advantage for a victory.

The fluid asymmetry of its positions does tend toward decisive results, but it does not lend itself to engine evaluation. Against certain players this also makes it a dangerous surprise, and not infrequently the decision somehow fails to go the way White anticipated. ;-)

No. Merely that it makes equalizing more difficult and slower, and forces Black to play a position of uncongenial (relative) passivity, with constant vigilance required to avoid an early disadvantage.

(On the other hand, it's not necessarily White's first choice either, thanks to its drawish tendencies when played correctly.)

<I remember my first GM interaction. I got to play a simul against GM Bagirov. I offered a draw. The GM came to me, picked up his Rook and my bishop and said in his thick Russian accent said "You see Bishop and you see Rook and you say DRAW?" My first GM lesson on piece evaluation.>

it's good to go loving what you do, like bing crosby did... he and his partner played 3 pro golfers in spain and doctor warned crosby not to play more than 9 holes, but he played 18 and he won and when he said: "my, that was a swell game", he dropped dead!