 |
 |
|
|
|
10-26-2011, 09:23 AM
|
#1 (permalink) |
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 16
|
what's wrong with e3 opening?
Just before I go into this, I'm a learner of Chess (no expert) so sorry if some find the following question a bit basic! All help welcome.
I play chess online and was using the standard e4 opening a lot of the time, until recently. I noticed that heaps of players respond by favouring an attack on my f2 pawn by using their bishop on c5 and bringing their knight to g4. Obviously you're in danger of losing a rook or worse when this happens. In response, I started using Van 't Kruijs Opening (e3) and have found that, not only does this thwarte the standard attack described above, it also seems to leave a lot of players with pre-determined openings very wrong footed and to be honest, I have had a lot of victories since making the switch. I am just wondering why it is an irregular opening and seems to be somewhat unpopular when Bishop-c5 / Knight-g4 attack seems so common? |
 |
|
|
10-26-2011, 02:58 PM
|
#2 (permalink) |
|
Tin Cup Champ 2004
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Cairns
Posts: 6,233
ICC Handle: Advantage
FICS Handle: Advantage
|
Originally Posted by mdroc1
Doesn't white lose the initiative with this opening?
__________________
. "The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing." ~ Isaiah Berlin ~ |
 |
|
|
10-26-2011, 03:39 PM
|
#3 (permalink) |
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 16
|
yes - it is certainly a more defensive opening by white.
However, to overcome the knight advancing to g4, I usually have to play h3. That's fine, but the c5 bishop will linger and this presents a bit of a headache when castling later on. Sure - the bishops line can be disrupted by having a stand-off/exchange in the centre, often by moving the pawn to d4, but somehow this exchange seems fiddly on many occasions, I don't emerge with an advantage and it seems like a lot of moving around and effort when e3 thwartes the attack in one sweep and as mentioned, seems like so many opponents end up more muddled that if I leave the door open for them to go Bc5 and Nf6 -> Ng4... |
|
|
|
|
10-26-2011, 05:10 PM
|
#4 (permalink) |
|
Tin Cup Champ 2004
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Cairns
Posts: 6,233
ICC Handle: Advantage
FICS Handle: Advantage
|
What's your rating? I suspect this only works on low rated players, which is why I ask.
__________________
. "The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing." ~ Isaiah Berlin ~ |
|
|
|
|
10-26-2011, 06:57 PM
|
#5 (permalink) |
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 16
|
No problems
 I think my rating is around the 1500-1600 mark, so not very high! Also most of the players I play are requesting longer games rather than rapid ones. I have beaten a few players who had ratings around the 1530 mark, but once they start to get towards 1700, I battle to win. |
|
|
|
|
10-26-2011, 11:03 PM
|
#6 (permalink) |
|
Moderator
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Getting owned by White in the Dragon and trying to recover lost positions from shock paralysis OTB
Posts: 2,044
ICC Handle: guest
|
Hi,
Basically the issue goes like this.... When facing 1.e4 the real chess players play 1..c5 because its just so good! Those sick puppies who play 1..e6 against 1.e4 are deliberately avoiding an opportunity to play the Sicilian, so that they can defend a crappy French. These type of fools are to be pitied. Therefore, when you play White 1.e3 , you are basically aligning yourself with French players around the world. Whilst it cannot be a bad move, voluntarily playing the French defence on the first move is clearly inferior to 1.c4!
__________________
"...What I meant? Dear Mr Ian Rout (ACF news publisher) could you please put Ozchessforum in the next news letter! There is no reason to hide this forum from the Australian chess public. What they meant? Sorry, No english!- Amir Karibasic 
|
|
|
|
 |
|
||||||
| Thread Tools | |
| Rate This Thread | |
|
|
