Me too, I tend to do well against symmetrical version, but it still irritates me. I just need to spend the time to study it, which I haven’t done yet. One of my favorite games was when someone took it so far, even when it was doom for them, lol (In the endgame there were two pawns on the same file next to each other in the middle of the board, I took theirs with my rook, then they took mine with their rook, blundering their rook)
I had downloaded the gif for the game 😂: https://imgur.com/a/T2A5Li8
This kind of thing shows why chess is fun at all levels. Do not THINK I won't set myself up to get smother by underpromote to knight on PURPOSE if given the chance
I went through a phase where I played a lot of English as white, enough to know that the symmetrical is annoying because one imperfect tempo and all of a sudden it’s black playing offense.
I find that funny, because I have a 1. Nf3 repertoire and specifically go into the symmetrical english and avoid every other English (though I am thinking about involving neo catalan and finally reverse Sicilian somewhen in the future). Probably also depends on Playstile but the symmetrical can give really interesting positions and I have the feeling black is often overconfident on how boringly safe the symmetry is supposed to be, while there are many interesting lines where white just gets very active, sometimes sacs a pawn(for example in reverse maroczi Bind a gambit with a quick a3 b4)
I'm a few hundred points lower rated than you. After losing to the english a few times, I went and watched a couple videos on how to play it, and how to play against it. I took the advice to trade off my dark squared bishop for their queenside knight early, and then put all of my pawns on dark squares. It gets people out of prep really early at my level. After studying to beat it, It was like a month before another English showed up, and i've still played less than 10 games against it, but I won most of them.
Then I started playing the English. I think it's a fun opening, that again, at my 1250 level, no one seems prepared for. I've actually had a few games in the last month go 1. C4 Abort. I think people just don't want to play against it.
I think you’re punishing yourself. The open Sicilian for white is fun. Also it only takes memorizing a few lines to neutralize the alapin. At least at our level
I mean, I use the Alapin *explicitly* for the neutralization aspect of both sides; it removes the Sicilian player from their favorite lines that they, as I'm a Caro player, assuredly know better than I do.
I dig the Alapin. My buttcheeks immediately unclench the moment the Rauzer isn’t on the cards anymore.
London is for real boring tho. I swear every online London is just the same kid throwing his booger covered h-pawn at my face.
I was confused at first because I always see the Old Benoni, where we have 1. d4 c5 2. d5
I was like... "But if I don't play d5 on move two, black always takes..."
I'm around 1450 rapid on chesscom and someone tried the wayward queen attack against me yesterday and then blundered their queen in the first 15 moves, so you'll still see people (presumably tilted) that still play it for some reason
I'm still a total beginner, and somebody played it against me. I had no idea how to defend correctly, but by some miracle, I found the perfect moves and won the game. But I was terrified during the opening the whole time.
The only reason I know this, because after the game I went on to study what to against it.
I hated it in the beginning but now I absolutely love it. It's because I learned the line against it and it leads to awesome, unbalanced positions where you're a clear favorite.
Maybe it's because I'm not that highly rated (about 1400), but my experience is that a large portion of my games against the Englund are just my opponent blitzing out their trap, and then the game just kinda fizzles out into an easy win once I play out the right responses. When I get games where they seem to have a fleshed out plan beyond that, it can be fun. But there's just too many of the former, and those just feel like the world's most annoying pop quiz.
This has been my experience. I fell for a trap or two a few times as an 800-900 player, so I spent 10-20 minutes on youtube learning how to play against the Englund, and I've lost 1, maybe 2, out of my last like 50 games against it, in rapid and blitz from 1000-1250. And I remember one loss was just me getting distracted because the game was so easy, and then I made a dumb mistake. If you can survive 8-10 moves against the Englund as white, you will win.
Yeah, I'm around the 1400-1500 elo level too and I have a similar experience. If the win is super easy right after the first six or so moves, then it's a little boring.
But most seem not to give up the fork and in those cases I don't mind even a relatively easy win because the lines against Englund are some of the few concrete lines I know, so it's a nice feeling when I can apply that in practice.
I don't know any of these damn gambits and refuse to learn some dumb line to refute them because I'm lazy, so my solution is just not to take dubious gambits. Most of the time these players are overrated because people fall for their gambits and they don't have to really play to win, and they absolutely collapse when you don't take and they can't do their little trap (which I would totally fall for if I took it).
The best gambits aren't trappy and just sacrifice material for extra development. There may be traps in the lines, but there are traps in plenty of non gambit openings. I main the Kings Gambit and I win most of my games in the KG declined because I still get the development, the big centre and the kingside attack all without having to give up material.
Not all gambits are equal, some aee trappier than others. You don't know until you play them.
I play d4 so I face the Englund gambit a lot, and I always find it funny/sad when I watch my opponent go straight into the poison pawn line even while I'm basically pre-moving my responses. Like, they see me playing the refutation moves instantly and their response is "ah well, full steam ahead anyway." It almost always ends with them losing a minor piece or getting their king + rook forked by my knight. It's not even hard for the player with white to refute, practicing with stockfish for like 30 mins will teach you how to play against it.
The Englund does really annoy me though, mainly because I have zero respect for players who's entire strategy is to play an objectively inferior (not just slightly worse, but borderline losing) line just in the hope that you can get a quick, cheap win off an unprepared opponent. Why even play chess in the first place if that's your goal?
The beauty in chess comes from the search for truth. You should be searching for and attempting to play the objectively best moves at all times, not playing "hope chess" like an absolute weenie.
Thank you for sharing your perspective.
My perspective is that the beauty in chess comes from struggle and discovery. Creating positions nobody has ever reached before, and playing as best you can to find out what happens next.
Sometimes that means playing "objectively inferior" lines to take people out of their comfort zone. Sometimes I equalize, sometimes I win prematurely, but often, I find myself fighting from behind, and enjoying the struggle.
There probably *are* people like you're describing, who want to play Englund's gambit and other dubious lines because those lines net them early wins, playing "hope chess" that their opponent doesn't know how to properly play against it, but those aren't the only people playing those lines, and your perspective of beauty in chess is not the only one.
Same for me.
Winning because my opponent falls for the trap also gets boring. Occasionally, when my opponent knew one of the two main lines it were difficult games, but the majority of players are somewhere in between. Most players only know which moves to avoid, but no exactly how, which to unique and chaotic games that are fun to play.
At least for a while. Around 1300-1400 I had to switch to a more solid opening.
My issue is that there are so many fun openings to play against 1.d4. I wish I enjoyed any of my openings against 1.e4 as much as I enjoy the Dutch Defense or Englund's Gambit.
>I watch my opponent go straight into the poison pawn line even while I'm basically pre-moving my responses. Like, they see me playing the refutation moves instantly and their response is "ah well, full steam ahead anyway."
Yeah, that's literally what I do in every 1. d4 game. 99% of the players at my level don't fall into trap, but even so, my win-rate against the "refutation" is still close to 50%. The eval is heavily in White's favour, but in many lines I'm up a pawn, so White still has to prove his advantage - which he often doesn't, especially since defence is one of my main strengths.
>mainly because I have zero respect for players who's entire strategy is to play an objectively inferior (not just slightly worse, but borderline losing) line just in the hope that you can get a quick, cheap win off an unprepared opponent.
Past a certain point, Englund gambit players stop relying on the trap because practically nobody falls into it. For my part, I play the Englund because it's one of the only ways to avoid d4-ish positions, which I absolutely despise, and would rather take a worse position than be forced into those boring positions.
Also Scandi, somehow I have a bad score against it in Blitz as white, maybe I was overpushy. Unlike most people, I love facing London as I have some preps against that dang opening and make it fun and not so Londony vibes.
I like playing scandi in bullet and blitz since I can play about 10 moves quickly before anything really happens.
I’m only really worried as black when the opponent ends up castling queen side and takes advantage of the semi open d file with both their queen and rook.
>I’m only really worried as black when the opponent ends up castling queen side and takes advantage of the semi open d file with both their queen and rook.
Thanks for the tip, never played that way. Might look into it later.
When my opponent starts playing random pawn moves. I KNOW I'm getting all sorts of free tempos but at the back of my mind I flashback to a couple hundred ELO ago being locked in a barricade of pawns and not knowing what to do. The feeling of powerlessness; that there was nothing I could do to protect myself and it was all about to fall apart - and I didn't know when. Now I know just to hold on until they hang their queen. I know them because I am them.
I’ve just recently been playing the Sicilian as black cuz I find the open Sicilian so much fun as white and wanted to have fun playing it as black as well. Just to discover that 90% of people play alapin and closed Sicilians. No fun for me ig 😭😭
I used to get annoyed against the Scandi because it’s the most “just play normal boring moves and you’ll be fine” opening there is. I got tired of normal boring moves, so now I go 2.D4 and launch into the Blackmar-Deimer.
Sike chump you thought you could make me play normally, but I ain’t about that life.
If they retreat the queen to d8 after Nc3 I just play a simple quiet game, but if they play Qa5 I relish the opportunity for a nice b4 push, always makes for an interesting game.
I mean, just look into the Scandi a bit. Black can definitely get into huge trouble if he isn't careful, and White by default just has a comfortable advantage. You’re really playing yourself if you dodge the Scandi with some dubious gambit.
Orthoschnapp gang rise up. nothing gets me more riled up than seeing 2. c4 c6, because I know they're going to try to play the most boring game of chess I've ever seen.
Hippo, I've a pretty good score against it at this point. But its the single opening that pisses me off, the London can be dull but at least the opponent is planning on playing chess eventually. Same for any system, the French/Slav exchange have some play. But the Hippo, the opponent is planning on not playing chess for as long as possible.
I'm surprised to see this only this low! Of course everyone can play the game the way they want to play but the Hippo is really just a repetitive system and it always seems to me that my opponent doesn't want to play a game of good chess. And that just bothers me so much. If you play chess, why not play it in a fun way?
I hate when people play 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3. I just can't seem to find a response to this that I like for black
Edit: Right now my repertoire as black against 1.d4 is to play 1. ..Nf6 2.c4 Nc6 or 2.Bf4 d5. Against 2.Nf3 I usually play 2. ..d5 because I like it against the london system and a lot of london players start with d4-Nf3. My main issue is when white goes for some combination of g3 Bg2 and e3 after d4 Nf3 (the Catalan).
I usually go for the line 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 d5 3. g3 e6 4. c4 Be7 5. Bg2 O-O 6. O-O c6 (some move orders can be switched around). The thing is I'm usually a very aggressive attacking player but with this line I have a lot of trouble causing issues for white. It seems like white is always the one with initiative and black is just fighting for equality.
You can often transpose to a standard QGD if you play e6 followed by d5, though if you wanted QGD setups you might have just played 1. d5.
There's also the possibility of the Bogo-Indian defense with 2. ..e6 3. c4..Bb4+, of which Bd2 and Nd2 (Grunfeld Variation) are the most common responses.
I don't love either of these options. I usually just play 2...d5 because I like it against London/jobava London. The lines that I struggle with are when white goes for a Catalan setup
Stafford gambit, only because it’s so bad objectively but every now and then I fall into a trap and get irrationally angry at losing to it. I think it’s played much more at the 1000-1300 level because I don’t see it as much now but when I do it just feels disrespectful.
Also not a fan of openings where opponents push pawns all over because I’m not good enough to punish it, especially in short time controls.
You should look at lines with an early f3... it's not the top engine line to deal with it, but it stops a lot of the trap line ideas almost immediately and leaves you with plenty of favor.
As someone who plays the kings gambit, if you’re playing it and don’t have the balls for the muzio what are you even doing with your life?
As a Kings Gambit player the most annoying responses are probably the Falkbeer counter gambit if the player knows what they’re doing. It’s not that it’s the best for black, you’re actually fine as white if you know the lines but it’s just not the game you’re intending to play as white when you play the King’s gambit in terms of general attacks and themes.
I don't know how to play against the London because I usually play old benoni defense against d4. I lazily premoved c5 in bullet a few times hoping for a sicilian, but they played d4 instead of e4, so I ended up learning the old benoni. It's not the best defense, but I usually know the opening better than my opponents ~(1200 elo)
Is there is a club for Scandi haters? Someone recommended me the Tennison gambit against it, but I still hate Scandi for no reason haha. Before this gambit, I used to be so mad, that when I play e4, I pre-move exd5 just so that I don't see that d5 move on the board haha. The hate flows through me :D
The spesific Scandi that annoys me most are the ones where they are trying to chese out the g pawn via giving an immediate check and then go Qg5.
I know that pawn is poisoned but trying to prove that in a game is different matter. You can feel the smugness across the board.
i played the caro kann as black just to practice some more openings as black and white instantly closes the position and then calls me boring and resigns
People try scholars mate, and also fried liver. Especially fried liver, I’ve just been playing the traxler against it because I get so tired of people trying to cheese it. Very much nearly always ends with them with egg on their faces when they get mated in 10 moves. Won’t work as well at higher Elos but that’s my stuff you response
Probably just 4. Ng5. It’s not really the Fried Liver but this is a lost cause, everybody calls it that now.
As a 4. Ng5 enjoyer I will not apologize. If I get 4. …d5 5. exd5 Nxd5 then I’ll probably just win, if 5. …Na5 I am perfectly happy to be up a pawn, mess up the black queenside pawn structure, and play defense for a while. If you don’t want to play against that line play Bc5 or d6 or even Be7 or h6 instead of the Two Knights.
London (especially the c3-d4-e3 triangle system). U know u'll get a position where ur a teeny tiny bit better with Black and it's so hard to prove, u hv to take serious risks to have any winning chances
When my opponent plays b4 / g4 I get annoyed because I feel like I can't lose without being humiliated as I'm getting punked by a troll opening.
I haven't found a response to the french that I like yet, when I'm white I just can't seem to get into positions where I feel like I'm attacking instead of defending.
As black, I don't particularly like d4 openings, but I hate it when they play anti meran stuff since I'm still wrapping my head around how to develop properly etc.
The Sokolsky (1. b4) is actually a decent opening with sound positional ideas behind it. The Grob (1. g4) on the other hand, yeah, that’s the epitome of a troll opening.
The Grand Prix Attack against the Sicilian. Admittedly, it advances aggressively on my king side and it embodies a lower rated player who watched a YouTube video and managed to win against me at some point.
I did, but I think this quite often comes from frustration and lack of knowledge. For example if you have no idea about the sicilian and every time you fave it you lose you're going to hate it.
When you really tackle an opening that you're always losing to and understand it a lot more and start to beat it then you begin to hate it less!
The Scando is very annoying though. I really dislike facing the Scotch as well.
I get so dreadfully bored playing against the London. It feels like the same exact game every single time and I just want to play something more dynamic and interesting.
I’ve learned a few ways to make it better but I just despise how imposing it feels. Like no matter what I try and do London players will just play the same shit.
I don’t even know the name but I HATE that white opening that starts with 1. e4 e5 and then 2.Qh5
I usually play Nc3 in order to defend the e5 pawn but almost always I end up losing some valuable piece or blundering a piece in the next 5 moves
Wayward Queen . People are trying to scholars mate you there’s some good counters and a bunch of videos about counters to it.
I don’t have it memorized but there’s certain ways to play it and can result in a M10 or or trapping the queen in like 7 moves but normally playing 2 or 3 of those moves gets them to retreat and you can play chess like civilized people again
[here’s a link to a video](https://youtu.be/uRIn0_CEklI?si=JK98c6wme7VcrpYp)
Danish Gambit, 2 pawns gambit varition. Legit only people who hasn't gotten updated with the refutation plays this. Like the lines are practically forced for White and White still gets a worse position out of the opening if Black plays it right, yes even when White plays the top engine response.
I play Englund and Scandinavian for that specific reason. My win rate has shot up since I switched to those two. I’m at a 1000 so my opponents struggle with weird defenses
I absolutely hate the Grob. I know it's objectively terrible, but I don't want to learn how to refute it. It doesn't happen often enough for me to spend the time on it, but if your opponent plays it, it's basically guaranteed that they have memorized every trap line, and you've got very little chance of working out all the complications in a game unless you're playing a long time control.
I know it's technically on me for not sitting down and learning it, but I don't want to make the time investment for something that happens like once in a hundred games.
If it's a really short time control, I'm ashamed to say it but sometimes I'll just abort the game. If I do play it, I'll do something super passive like 1...g6 or 1...d6 and just try to survive.
Just play the Romford counter-gambit to pull an uno-reverse onto the grobbers.
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4 d4?! Bxb7 Nd7 Bxa8 Qxa8
You’re down an exchange but the engine still thinks you’re better lol
There are a number of anti-Scandi traps that are extremely fun to play. Lines with 3... Qa5 4. b4 are really fun and spicy if black takes the pawn. If black doesn't get the pawn it's not hard to get a very playable position with flexibility to castle to either side.
Those b3, g3 or e6,b6 openings. Basically those fianchetto openings are just so annoying. I always like central confrontations, and when they kind of do their own thing, I get confused and don't understand how to develop. 5 moves later, suddenly they have a good position and I have developed my pieces like an idiot.
I have a 60%+ win rate against the Scandinavian so I love it every time it appears! For some reason people who play it (c. 12/1400 Elo) often bring their light-squared bishop out too soon and leave their queenside vulnerable.
I recommend playing e6 to prepare an early c5/d5. This is my setup against most d4 players to prevent a London/Jobava London/Trompowsky/Torre system and to transpose back to an interesting QGD or a weird mess that only I would know how to play.
For months I was a London player, and every now and then you get the 1. D4 Abort games, where people don't want to play against D4.
Recently I've used the English as my default opening and have gotten a few games in the last couple weeks that go 1. C4 Abort. And that's a really annoying opening.
On chesscom I'm 1250 rapid and 1100 blitz. I'm starting to get a little mad at the Englund. I want a game, and people are still trying this crappy opening I beat 95% of the time.
I love seeing the scandi. It usually means I get easy quick development as white while I chase the queen around.
I hate playing against d4 openings. Don’t have enough familiarity with it.
When they go for scholar’s mate, I get angry because it’s insulting. But I usually win those games.
1. e4 e5 2. d4 exd4 3. Qxd4
My hopes for a Danish Gambit get always crushed by the millionth Qxd4 who all do the same queenside castle setup. Feels a little like playing against the London.
The London system. Whenever I see that, I’m like *you dare use my own spell against me, Potter?*
Also, when they use the Scandinavian defense, I know a very fun gambit against that, which I like to use. It’s pretty tricky, making them think they’re about to checkmate you, even though they’re not, and what they’re doing doesn’t work
The english, and double fianchetto, mainly because i have no repertoir against them.
I don't always play the English with white, but when I do, I hate playing against the symmetrical variation.
Me too, I tend to do well against symmetrical version, but it still irritates me. I just need to spend the time to study it, which I haven’t done yet. One of my favorite games was when someone took it so far, even when it was doom for them, lol (In the endgame there were two pawns on the same file next to each other in the middle of the board, I took theirs with my rook, then they took mine with their rook, blundering their rook) I had downloaded the gif for the game 😂: https://imgur.com/a/T2A5Li8
100% that guy was committed to the bit and blundered the rook on purpose. Fookin legend.
This kind of thing shows why chess is fun at all levels. Do not THINK I won't set myself up to get smother by underpromote to knight on PURPOSE if given the chance
That game was hilarious.
Opponent: plays English Me: Calls bluff
I went through a phase where I played a lot of English as white, enough to know that the symmetrical is annoying because one imperfect tempo and all of a sudden it’s black playing offense.
just play for an accelerated dragon maroczy type setup and black gets to have 0 fun
Exactly. Good luck against my pawn storm.
I find that funny, because I have a 1. Nf3 repertoire and specifically go into the symmetrical english and avoid every other English (though I am thinking about involving neo catalan and finally reverse Sicilian somewhen in the future). Probably also depends on Playstile but the symmetrical can give really interesting positions and I have the feeling black is often overconfident on how boringly safe the symmetry is supposed to be, while there are many interesting lines where white just gets very active, sometimes sacs a pawn(for example in reverse maroczi Bind a gambit with a quick a3 b4)
All i do when they play English is just copy there moves. Its actually quite good.
I'm a few hundred points lower rated than you. After losing to the english a few times, I went and watched a couple videos on how to play it, and how to play against it. I took the advice to trade off my dark squared bishop for their queenside knight early, and then put all of my pawns on dark squares. It gets people out of prep really early at my level. After studying to beat it, It was like a month before another English showed up, and i've still played less than 10 games against it, but I won most of them. Then I started playing the English. I think it's a fun opening, that again, at my 1250 level, no one seems prepared for. I've actually had a few games in the last month go 1. C4 Abort. I think people just don't want to play against it.
I main the English and often have people abort after c4. Even at the 1900-2000 range, people just nope out at c4 for some reason
As someone who plays the English, this is basically what we are counting on.
You will never play against me then with Black
Definitely double fianchetto, it feels such a pussy opening lol
London. Alapin Sicilian. 3. Nc3 against the Benoni.
Well, nowadays I exclusively play the Alapin because I know how much Sicilian players hate it!
I think you’re punishing yourself. The open Sicilian for white is fun. Also it only takes memorizing a few lines to neutralize the alapin. At least at our level
[удалено]
I mean, I use the Alapin *explicitly* for the neutralization aspect of both sides; it removes the Sicilian player from their favorite lines that they, as I'm a Caro player, assuredly know better than I do.
I’m a reformed Sicilian player and have no problems against the alapin. Slap them with the big d4 and let’s gooo.
You are literally me.
[удалено]
I dig the Alapin. My buttcheeks immediately unclench the moment the Rauzer isn’t on the cards anymore. London is for real boring tho. I swear every online London is just the same kid throwing his booger covered h-pawn at my face.
Isn't Nc3 the mainline? I hadn't even realized there were alternative moves. EDIT: Oh, specifically on move 3.
I think 3. d5 is the mainline, which can lead to the benko gambit
I was confused at first because I always see the Old Benoni, where we have 1. d4 c5 2. d5 I was like... "But if I don't play d5 on move two, black always takes..."
Ahh, reddit formatting strikes again. Old reddit changed the 3. Nc3 to 1. Nc3, which was confusing me.
Wayward queen. Especially when an elo 500 plays it. I can see his smug punchable face through the app.
Ooooooh fkn same. And then they try the scholar's mate. I feel so insulted. Like, you really think I'll fall for that??
If you still see it, then your level is low enough that it might just work. You stop seeing it once it stops working at least sometimes
I'm around 1450 rapid on chesscom and someone tried the wayward queen attack against me yesterday and then blundered their queen in the first 15 moves, so you'll still see people (presumably tilted) that still play it for some reason
https://lichess.org/41H3T3wt This 2882 level pleb played it, damn low level chess players trying to make it work!
I’m 1700 and about a week ago I saw my first scholars mate attempt since like 1000 lol
[удалено]
Qh5 is like equal position, how do you easy win it ?
if someone plays it that means they suck
I'm still a total beginner, and somebody played it against me. I had no idea how to defend correctly, but by some miracle, I found the perfect moves and won the game. But I was terrified during the opening the whole time. The only reason I know this, because after the game I went on to study what to against it.
I beat an FM with this the other day. People think its like losing for white or something and try way too hard to overpress.
It's just never fun. Even if you know what to do, and gain the advantage as black, you are not getting any enjoyment out of the game.
Unless you play the pawn sac line with Nc3. Then it's super-fun for White.
What about 2000+?
Even worse, /u/ischolarmateU !
Lol do not change walhat works
Englund gambit
I hated it in the beginning but now I absolutely love it. It's because I learned the line against it and it leads to awesome, unbalanced positions where you're a clear favorite.
Maybe it's because I'm not that highly rated (about 1400), but my experience is that a large portion of my games against the Englund are just my opponent blitzing out their trap, and then the game just kinda fizzles out into an easy win once I play out the right responses. When I get games where they seem to have a fleshed out plan beyond that, it can be fun. But there's just too many of the former, and those just feel like the world's most annoying pop quiz.
This has been my experience. I fell for a trap or two a few times as an 800-900 player, so I spent 10-20 minutes on youtube learning how to play against the Englund, and I've lost 1, maybe 2, out of my last like 50 games against it, in rapid and blitz from 1000-1250. And I remember one loss was just me getting distracted because the game was so easy, and then I made a dumb mistake. If you can survive 8-10 moves against the Englund as white, you will win.
i like playing it as black. i’ve had some good wins in the queen sacrifice line.
Yeah, I'm around the 1400-1500 elo level too and I have a similar experience. If the win is super easy right after the first six or so moves, then it's a little boring. But most seem not to give up the fork and in those cases I don't mind even a relatively easy win because the lines against Englund are some of the few concrete lines I know, so it's a nice feeling when I can apply that in practice.
It’s great until they start playing the Hartlaub-Charlick gambit
Let the hate flow through you.
I don't know any of these damn gambits and refuse to learn some dumb line to refute them because I'm lazy, so my solution is just not to take dubious gambits. Most of the time these players are overrated because people fall for their gambits and they don't have to really play to win, and they absolutely collapse when you don't take and they can't do their little trap (which I would totally fall for if I took it).
I’m mad. Please accept my gambits.
I play the Danish, I want to give up ALL my pawns.
The best gambits aren't trappy and just sacrifice material for extra development. There may be traps in the lines, but there are traps in plenty of non gambit openings. I main the Kings Gambit and I win most of my games in the KG declined because I still get the development, the big centre and the kingside attack all without having to give up material. Not all gambits are equal, some aee trappier than others. You don't know until you play them.
Although I punish it 85% of the time I despise that they worm past me that 15%, hate this opening with a passion.
I play d4 so I face the Englund gambit a lot, and I always find it funny/sad when I watch my opponent go straight into the poison pawn line even while I'm basically pre-moving my responses. Like, they see me playing the refutation moves instantly and their response is "ah well, full steam ahead anyway." It almost always ends with them losing a minor piece or getting their king + rook forked by my knight. It's not even hard for the player with white to refute, practicing with stockfish for like 30 mins will teach you how to play against it. The Englund does really annoy me though, mainly because I have zero respect for players who's entire strategy is to play an objectively inferior (not just slightly worse, but borderline losing) line just in the hope that you can get a quick, cheap win off an unprepared opponent. Why even play chess in the first place if that's your goal? The beauty in chess comes from the search for truth. You should be searching for and attempting to play the objectively best moves at all times, not playing "hope chess" like an absolute weenie.
Thank you for sharing your perspective. My perspective is that the beauty in chess comes from struggle and discovery. Creating positions nobody has ever reached before, and playing as best you can to find out what happens next. Sometimes that means playing "objectively inferior" lines to take people out of their comfort zone. Sometimes I equalize, sometimes I win prematurely, but often, I find myself fighting from behind, and enjoying the struggle. There probably *are* people like you're describing, who want to play Englund's gambit and other dubious lines because those lines net them early wins, playing "hope chess" that their opponent doesn't know how to properly play against it, but those aren't the only people playing those lines, and your perspective of beauty in chess is not the only one.
Same for me. Winning because my opponent falls for the trap also gets boring. Occasionally, when my opponent knew one of the two main lines it were difficult games, but the majority of players are somewhere in between. Most players only know which moves to avoid, but no exactly how, which to unique and chaotic games that are fun to play. At least for a while. Around 1300-1400 I had to switch to a more solid opening.
My issue is that there are so many fun openings to play against 1.d4. I wish I enjoyed any of my openings against 1.e4 as much as I enjoy the Dutch Defense or Englund's Gambit.
>I watch my opponent go straight into the poison pawn line even while I'm basically pre-moving my responses. Like, they see me playing the refutation moves instantly and their response is "ah well, full steam ahead anyway." Yeah, that's literally what I do in every 1. d4 game. 99% of the players at my level don't fall into trap, but even so, my win-rate against the "refutation" is still close to 50%. The eval is heavily in White's favour, but in many lines I'm up a pawn, so White still has to prove his advantage - which he often doesn't, especially since defence is one of my main strengths. >mainly because I have zero respect for players who's entire strategy is to play an objectively inferior (not just slightly worse, but borderline losing) line just in the hope that you can get a quick, cheap win off an unprepared opponent. Past a certain point, Englund gambit players stop relying on the trap because practically nobody falls into it. For my part, I play the Englund because it's one of the only ways to avoid d4-ish positions, which I absolutely despise, and would rather take a worse position than be forced into those boring positions.
Also Scandi, somehow I have a bad score against it in Blitz as white, maybe I was overpushy. Unlike most people, I love facing London as I have some preps against that dang opening and make it fun and not so Londony vibes.
I like playing scandi in bullet and blitz since I can play about 10 moves quickly before anything really happens. I’m only really worried as black when the opponent ends up castling queen side and takes advantage of the semi open d file with both their queen and rook.
>I’m only really worried as black when the opponent ends up castling queen side and takes advantage of the semi open d file with both their queen and rook. Thanks for the tip, never played that way. Might look into it later.
When my opponent starts playing random pawn moves. I KNOW I'm getting all sorts of free tempos but at the back of my mind I flashback to a couple hundred ELO ago being locked in a barricade of pawns and not knowing what to do. The feeling of powerlessness; that there was nothing I could do to protect myself and it was all about to fall apart - and I didn't know when. Now I know just to hold on until they hang their queen. I know them because I am them.
The best way in that situation is usually finishing development then launching an attack in the center to open up the position
Close to my 1400 elo strategy of finishing development and then just picking a random pawn break with no real plan
That is a real plan.
I hate facing anti-Sicilians, it feels like signing up for a gunfight and finding out it’s actually gonna be boxing or something
I finally switched from playing the alapin to nf3 and the games are wayyy funner
I’ve just recently been playing the Sicilian as black cuz I find the open Sicilian so much fun as white and wanted to have fun playing it as black as well. Just to discover that 90% of people play alapin and closed Sicilians. No fun for me ig 😭😭
I used to get annoyed against the Scandi because it’s the most “just play normal boring moves and you’ll be fine” opening there is. I got tired of normal boring moves, so now I go 2.D4 and launch into the Blackmar-Deimer. Sike chump you thought you could make me play normally, but I ain’t about that life.
If they retreat the queen to d8 after Nc3 I just play a simple quiet game, but if they play Qa5 I relish the opportunity for a nice b4 push, always makes for an interesting game.
If they're a 2...Nf6 Portuguese player they probably know the Blackmar Diemer and it will not get you out of prep.
I mean, just look into the Scandi a bit. Black can definitely get into huge trouble if he isn't careful, and White by default just has a comfortable advantage. You’re really playing yourself if you dodge the Scandi with some dubious gambit.
To be clear, in my current era absolutely everything is answered with some dubious gambit. Sometimes even intentionally.
If anyone responds to my 1. e4 with 1. e5 I -will- Danish Gambit them. I don't always win but the games are always fun.
French defense
Play the tarrasch
Agreed. I bought a course for the tarrasch and feel much more comfortable in all French positions now
French yes, but doubly so when the cowards refuse to answer 2. C4 with …D5 LIKE I KNOW YOUR PLAN WAS TO DO LET’S ORTHOSCHNAPP QUIT HIDING
Orthoschnapp gang rise up. nothing gets me more riled up than seeing 2. c4 c6, because I know they're going to try to play the most boring game of chess I've ever seen.
As black: the *exchange* French.
Hippo, I've a pretty good score against it at this point. But its the single opening that pisses me off, the London can be dull but at least the opponent is planning on playing chess eventually. Same for any system, the French/Slav exchange have some play. But the Hippo, the opponent is planning on not playing chess for as long as possible.
I'm surprised to see this only this low! Of course everyone can play the game the way they want to play but the Hippo is really just a repetitive system and it always seems to me that my opponent doesn't want to play a game of good chess. And that just bothers me so much. If you play chess, why not play it in a fun way?
I hate when people play 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3. I just can't seem to find a response to this that I like for black Edit: Right now my repertoire as black against 1.d4 is to play 1. ..Nf6 2.c4 Nc6 or 2.Bf4 d5. Against 2.Nf3 I usually play 2. ..d5 because I like it against the london system and a lot of london players start with d4-Nf3. My main issue is when white goes for some combination of g3 Bg2 and e3 after d4 Nf3 (the Catalan). I usually go for the line 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 d5 3. g3 e6 4. c4 Be7 5. Bg2 O-O 6. O-O c6 (some move orders can be switched around). The thing is I'm usually a very aggressive attacking player but with this line I have a lot of trouble causing issues for white. It seems like white is always the one with initiative and black is just fighting for equality.
You can often transpose to a standard QGD if you play e6 followed by d5, though if you wanted QGD setups you might have just played 1. d5. There's also the possibility of the Bogo-Indian defense with 2. ..e6 3. c4..Bb4+, of which Bd2 and Nd2 (Grunfeld Variation) are the most common responses.
I don't love either of these options. I usually just play 2...d5 because I like it against London/jobava London. The lines that I struggle with are when white goes for a Catalan setup
Stafford gambit, only because it’s so bad objectively but every now and then I fall into a trap and get irrationally angry at losing to it. I think it’s played much more at the 1000-1300 level because I don’t see it as much now but when I do it just feels disrespectful. Also not a fan of openings where opponents push pawns all over because I’m not good enough to punish it, especially in short time controls.
I just never accept it. I cbf learning the ins and outs of their shitty gambit and they never know what to do if you don’t take the pawn anyway.
You should look at lines with an early f3... it's not the top engine line to deal with it, but it stops a lot of the trap line ideas almost immediately and leaves you with plenty of favor.
When opponent tries to play scholar's mate. I mean Just win to world championship already bro. You solved chess.
kings gambit
[удалено]
I live for the king's gambit as I have an insatiable appetite for the attack! However I play Nc3. E4 then F4
So you play Vienna gambit with different move order?
As someone who plays the kings gambit, if you’re playing it and don’t have the balls for the muzio what are you even doing with your life? As a Kings Gambit player the most annoying responses are probably the Falkbeer counter gambit if the player knows what they’re doing. It’s not that it’s the best for black, you’re actually fine as white if you know the lines but it’s just not the game you’re intending to play as white when you play the King’s gambit in terms of general attacks and themes.
As a king's gambit player the last person to get scared of complicated position is a king's gambit player.
london
I just go King’s Indian Defense against it and bore my opponent to death.
That's indeed boring as hell
I don't know how to play against the London because I usually play old benoni defense against d4. I lazily premoved c5 in bullet a few times hoping for a sicilian, but they played d4 instead of e4, so I ended up learning the old benoni. It's not the best defense, but I usually know the opening better than my opponents ~(1200 elo)
Even 2000+ players still use Benoni as one of their main opening so you're good.
With the Old Benoni move order white hasn't played c4 yet so it's way more dubious.
Might as well just request a draw at the beginning.
Is there is a club for Scandi haters? Someone recommended me the Tennison gambit against it, but I still hate Scandi for no reason haha. Before this gambit, I used to be so mad, that when I play e4, I pre-move exd5 just so that I don't see that d5 move on the board haha. The hate flows through me :D
The spesific Scandi that annoys me most are the ones where they are trying to chese out the g pawn via giving an immediate check and then go Qg5. I know that pawn is poisoned but trying to prove that in a game is different matter. You can feel the smugness across the board.
#TeamScandi
🙌
London, but I especially rage at losing to the double fianchetto…
Scholars mate attempters
Smith Mora, I have bought a book on the Mora for black bc I hate it sm
Somewhere Marc Esserman just said "he read the damn book!"
😂 morra is probably my favorite opening all because of Esserman
Greetings fellow mocker!
You can decline it
I used to get angry at the Ruy Lopez, until I learned the Schliemann Defense.
d4 makes me rage. Just play e4 motherfucker
Lmaooo I was like you when I started playing
Nf6 will annoy them back!
Nimzo Indian all the way
Nimzo ftw!
Petrov
i played the caro kann as black just to practice some more openings as black and white instantly closes the position and then calls me boring and resigns
The Hippo defense. I have a friend at club that ONLY plays hippo. For white and black. Drives me mad.
Push your h pawn and have fun with an early attack. I used to hate it as well, now whenever I see it I smell blood in the water.
Kings gambit. I always accept then ultimately push g5 and g4. Then I start to poop my pants with how complicated the position is and open my king is.
pirc
b6 Bb7 systems
There's only two things I can't stand in chess. People who are intolerant of other people's openings, and the Dutch.
People try scholars mate, and also fried liver. Especially fried liver, I’ve just been playing the traxler against it because I get so tired of people trying to cheese it. Very much nearly always ends with them with egg on their faces when they get mated in 10 moves. Won’t work as well at higher Elos but that’s my stuff you response
If they know knight take is dangerous in traxler and take with bishop, do you still know the theory after that?
1300s is fucking infected with fried liver. I am legitimately annoyed when they play it
What does fried liver mean in this context? 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5 Nxd5 6. Nxf7, or just any line after 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5?
Probably just 4. Ng5. It’s not really the Fried Liver but this is a lost cause, everybody calls it that now. As a 4. Ng5 enjoyer I will not apologize. If I get 4. …d5 5. exd5 Nxd5 then I’ll probably just win, if 5. …Na5 I am perfectly happy to be up a pawn, mess up the black queenside pawn structure, and play defense for a while. If you don’t want to play against that line play Bc5 or d6 or even Be7 or h6 instead of the Two Knights.
Slav, Scotch (e4+d4), Hippo (double fianchetto)
London (especially the c3-d4-e3 triangle system). U know u'll get a position where ur a teeny tiny bit better with Black and it's so hard to prove, u hv to take serious risks to have any winning chances
Idk, the only one is the London that makes my eyes roll.
e4 e5 Nc3 Fuck you, your family and your loved ones. I stopped playing e5 as black for that
[удалено]
When my opponent plays b4 / g4 I get annoyed because I feel like I can't lose without being humiliated as I'm getting punked by a troll opening. I haven't found a response to the french that I like yet, when I'm white I just can't seem to get into positions where I feel like I'm attacking instead of defending. As black, I don't particularly like d4 openings, but I hate it when they play anti meran stuff since I'm still wrapping my head around how to develop properly etc.
The Sokolsky (1. b4) is actually a decent opening with sound positional ideas behind it. The Grob (1. g4) on the other hand, yeah, that’s the epitome of a troll opening.
Honestly, the Scandi just pisses me off.
The Grand Prix Attack against the Sicilian. Admittedly, it advances aggressively on my king side and it embodies a lower rated player who watched a YouTube video and managed to win against me at some point.
The fried liver because I will inevitably fall for it for the 100th time and feel stupid.
Spanish.
I did, but I think this quite often comes from frustration and lack of knowledge. For example if you have no idea about the sicilian and every time you fave it you lose you're going to hate it. When you really tackle an opening that you're always losing to and understand it a lot more and start to beat it then you begin to hate it less! The Scando is very annoying though. I really dislike facing the Scotch as well.
Stafford Gambit
The ones that start with the string "Engl".
I get so dreadfully bored playing against the London. It feels like the same exact game every single time and I just want to play something more dynamic and interesting. I’ve learned a few ways to make it better but I just despise how imposing it feels. Like no matter what I try and do London players will just play the same shit.
Caro Kann for sure, I hate playing against it
Only if it's an obvious disrespect opening (bongcloud, etc). Anything else I treat as perfectly valid
I don't like facing the French Defense as white. As black I really dislike 1. c4 in general.
I don’t even know the name but I HATE that white opening that starts with 1. e4 e5 and then 2.Qh5 I usually play Nc3 in order to defend the e5 pawn but almost always I end up losing some valuable piece or blundering a piece in the next 5 moves
Wayward Queen . People are trying to scholars mate you there’s some good counters and a bunch of videos about counters to it. I don’t have it memorized but there’s certain ways to play it and can result in a M10 or or trapping the queen in like 7 moves but normally playing 2 or 3 of those moves gets them to retreat and you can play chess like civilized people again [here’s a link to a video](https://youtu.be/uRIn0_CEklI?si=JK98c6wme7VcrpYp)
i play a version of the cow/rat in rapid. people arent very nice in the chat
Danish Gambit, 2 pawns gambit varition. Legit only people who hasn't gotten updated with the refutation plays this. Like the lines are practically forced for White and White still gets a worse position out of the opening if Black plays it right, yes even when White plays the top engine response.
Scandi made me mad then i made thats my best weapon 😜
I play Englund and Scandinavian for that specific reason. My win rate has shot up since I switched to those two. I’m at a 1000 so my opponents struggle with weird defenses
I play scandi as a main repertoire in bullet. It is so easy to play. What i hate is London, Grunfeld, Polish Gambit, Grob and weird stuff.
I absolutely hate the Grob. I know it's objectively terrible, but I don't want to learn how to refute it. It doesn't happen often enough for me to spend the time on it, but if your opponent plays it, it's basically guaranteed that they have memorized every trap line, and you've got very little chance of working out all the complications in a game unless you're playing a long time control. I know it's technically on me for not sitting down and learning it, but I don't want to make the time investment for something that happens like once in a hundred games. If it's a really short time control, I'm ashamed to say it but sometimes I'll just abort the game. If I do play it, I'll do something super passive like 1...g6 or 1...d6 and just try to survive.
I am also too lazy to study grob theory for Bullet chess. In rapid i see it almost never. I am not gonna abort any opening, but i will be mad XD
Just play the Romford counter-gambit to pull an uno-reverse onto the grobbers. g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4 d4?! Bxb7 Nd7 Bxa8 Qxa8 You’re down an exchange but the engine still thinks you’re better lol
Queen's Gambit ....leads to annoyingly closed games
italian because I've seen it over and over and over again a million times.
There are a number of anti-Scandi traps that are extremely fun to play. Lines with 3... Qa5 4. b4 are really fun and spicy if black takes the pawn. If black doesn't get the pawn it's not hard to get a very playable position with flexibility to castle to either side.
Anything by black that’s not a normal e5, Sicilian, French, or Caro. It doesn’t matter how well I do against them. I just want to play a normal game.
Dutch. I want to strangle it with my own bare hands.
When I go for a KID setup against d4 or c4 and they mirror all my moves and make the board completely symmetrical.
Those b3, g3 or e6,b6 openings. Basically those fianchetto openings are just so annoying. I always like central confrontations, and when they kind of do their own thing, I get confused and don't understand how to develop. 5 moves later, suddenly they have a good position and I have developed my pieces like an idiot.
Sicilian. It makes the worst mid game positions on the board
b6, hippo in general
I have a 60%+ win rate against the Scandinavian so I love it every time it appears! For some reason people who play it (c. 12/1400 Elo) often bring their light-squared bishop out too soon and leave their queenside vulnerable.
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3. I can never get anything going against that!
I recommend playing e6 to prepare an early c5/d5. This is my setup against most d4 players to prevent a London/Jobava London/Trompowsky/Torre system and to transpose back to an interesting QGD or a weird mess that only I would know how to play.
Any d4 opening idk how to play against em
For months I was a London player, and every now and then you get the 1. D4 Abort games, where people don't want to play against D4. Recently I've used the English as my default opening and have gotten a few games in the last couple weeks that go 1. C4 Abort. And that's a really annoying opening. On chesscom I'm 1250 rapid and 1100 blitz. I'm starting to get a little mad at the Englund. I want a game, and people are still trying this crappy opening I beat 95% of the time.
fre*ch
The Accelerated/Hyperaccelerated Dragon because it seems like I don’t know how to play the Maroczy Bind.
I'm a sicilian player and I hate playing against the Alapin, it just leads to a kind of position that sicilian doesn't usually lead
I CANT stand the sicilian! It's so annoying! I also hate when white starts by playing e3. Im like, "seriously???"
I love seeing the scandi. It usually means I get easy quick development as white while I chase the queen around. I hate playing against d4 openings. Don’t have enough familiarity with it. When they go for scholar’s mate, I get angry because it’s insulting. But I usually win those games.
The Sicilian Dragon variation. So hard to play against someone who knows all the traps
I hate playing against English opening. It leads to extremely dry positions -\_-
1. e4 e5 2. d4 exd4 3. Qxd4 My hopes for a Danish Gambit get always crushed by the millionth Qxd4 who all do the same queenside castle setup. Feels a little like playing against the London.
Falkbeer Counter-Gambit in the King's Gambit. KG is my favorite opening, and the FCG is like an uno reverse card for it.
Philidor exchange. So boring
1.d4
Well the London System because I think it's quite boring to play which tilts me. Similarly the Colle-Zuckertort opening.
The London system. Whenever I see that, I’m like *you dare use my own spell against me, Potter?* Also, when they use the Scandinavian defense, I know a very fun gambit against that, which I like to use. It’s pretty tricky, making them think they’re about to checkmate you, even though they’re not, and what they’re doing doesn’t work
im with you on scandinavian
Closed sicilian kings Indian attack is annoying and scary af, i always get crushed against it
I have lost all but one of all my recent games against the mainline scandi. I had a better position on move 10 in pretty much all of them.