Refuted Openings
-
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Refuted Openings
Hi
Any idea how can I find refuted openings?
Thanks in advance
Any idea how can I find refuted openings?
Thanks in advance
-
- Posts: 835
- Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 11:48 am
- Location: Bradford
Re: Refuted Openings
I've heard that 1.g4 e5 2.f3 isn't the best but the refutation is quite subtle and only the top GMs can really tease out the nuances and get a slight advantage for Black.
-
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Re: Refuted Openings
Believe me or not, some 16 years ago I reached such a position as Black and I gave a 2-move win.Andrew Bak wrote:I've heard that 1.g4 e5 2.f3 isn't the best but the refutation is quite subtle and only the top GMs can really tease out the nuances and get a slight advantage for Black.
-
- Posts: 7233
- Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:29 am
- Location: Cove, Hampshire, England.
Re: Refuted Openings
soheil_hooshdaran wrote:Hi
Any idea how can I find refuted openings?
Thanks in advance
Try the favourite reference work of Tony Miles:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/d/Books/Unorth ... s+openings
British Chess News : britishchessnews.com
Twitter: @BritishChess
Facebook: facebook.com/groups/britishchess
Twitter: @BritishChess
Facebook: facebook.com/groups/britishchess
-
- Posts: 1732
- Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 12:15 pm
Re: Refuted Openings
John Nunn offers a refutation of Latvian in 'Secrets of Practical Chess'
-
- Posts: 5250
- Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:51 pm
- Location: Millom, Cumbria
Re: Refuted Openings
I don't play the Latvian anymore, but there are more unsound openings than that which still catch the unwary........
Jerome's Gambit, anyone?
Jerome's Gambit, anyone?
"Set up your attacks so that when the fire is out, it isn't out!" (H N Pillsbury)
-
- Posts: 3053
- Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 10:58 am
Re: Refuted Openings
I'm not actually sure if they *have* refuted the Latvian. I seem to remember seeing that there were some efforts to grovel miserable but drawn rook endings in thematic correspondence? Stupid in practice of course but if you can't prove a win then.....
One thing that computers have made really, really, clear is just how hard it for an opening to be absolutely unplayable.
One thing that computers have made really, really, clear is just how hard it for an opening to be absolutely unplayable.
-
- Posts: 21322
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Re: Refuted Openings
They don't have a high opinion of the Latvian though. The sequence 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 f5 is assessed at only marginally better than leaving a pawn en-prise with 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 c5 . The Elephant 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 d5 is assessed as a quarter pawn "better" than the Latvian. Other engines may vary.MartinCarpenter wrote: One thing that computers have made really, really, clear is just how hard it for an opening to be absolutely unplayable.
Here's a miniature against the Latvian from a county match in 1999.
-
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Re: Refuted Openings
Who played it?
-
- Posts: 835
- Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 11:48 am
- Location: Bradford
Re: Refuted Openings
Apparently Hou Yifan didn't think this was refuted for White!Andrew Bak wrote:I've heard that 1.g4 e5 2.f3 isn't the best but the refutation is quite subtle and only the top GMs can really tease out the nuances and get a slight advantage for Black.
-
- Posts: 8838
- Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:34 am
- Location: London
Re: Refuted Openings
To be fair, she played something slightly different:Andrew Bak wrote:Apparently Hou Yifan didn't think this was refuted for White!Andrew Bak wrote:I've heard that 1.g4 e5 2.f3 isn't the best but the refutation is quite subtle and only the top GMs can really tease out the nuances and get a slight advantage for Black.
1. g4 d5 2. f3 e5
Still easily winning for Black.
Re: Refuted Openings
a4,the Ware opening is quite unusual but was seen here https://www.chessbomb.com/arena/2017-br ... ikor_Sevag
-
- Posts: 5250
- Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:51 pm
- Location: Millom, Cumbria
Re: Refuted Openings
Though is that (or any other first move for White save possibly 1f3) actually "refuted" as opposed to just not terribly good?
"Set up your attacks so that when the fire is out, it isn't out!" (H N Pillsbury)
Re: Refuted Openings
I wouldnt call 1 f3 refuted... I asked Susan Polgar who tweets me a lot and she said she wouldnt win 100% of the time against it!Matt Mackenzie wrote:Though is that (or any other first move for White save possibly 1f3) actually "refuted" as opposed to just not terribly good?
I think certain absurd gambits would be refuted.
-
- Posts: 149
- Joined: Sat Jul 25, 2009 8:31 am
Re: Refuted Openings
I think Kosten is more on the mark here.MartinCarpenter wrote:I'm not actually sure if they *have* refuted the Latvian. I seem to remember seeing that there were some efforts to grovel miserable but drawn rook endings in thematic correspondence? Stupid in practice of course but if you can't prove a win then.....
1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 f5 3 Nxe5 Qf6 4 Nc4 fxe4 5 Nc3 Qf7 6 Ne3 c6 7 Nxe4
Certainly it's 7 d3! that causes the real problems, especially in practical terms – it's difficult playing this position as Black even in blitz games.Tony Kosten wrote:This move is analysed by Nunn in his Practical Chess, and he even goes so far as to prefer this line to 7 d3! in NCO. However, this must be one of the most 'impractical' lines he could possibly have recommended, as White goes pawn hunting and finds himself subjected to a violent attack"
blog inspired by Bronstein's book, but using my own games: http://200opengames.blogspot.co.uk/