29 ( +1 | -1 ) 1a3...2h3i played a game recently and my opponent played 1a3... and 2h3 which I thought was quite amateurish but they played quite a good game. They eventually lost however, has anyone seen this opening for white and if so what is the best defence for black except the obvious 1...e5 2...d5
91 ( +1 | -1 ) Anderssen's OpeningThis is a rarely seen opening, White voluntarily gives up the advantage of the first move and usually ends up playing the game as though he had the Black pieces !!
Having said that, the opening lurks amongst the dustiest pages of most Super GM's opening books. To be brought out, dusted down and used to devastating effect when circumstances dictate, such as the following game where Super GM Peter Svidler decides to take poor old Fritz right out of it's opening book.
77 ( +1 | -1 ) A distinctionThere's nothing wrong with 1.a3. It's played in many variations of many openings, it doesn't weaken White's position, and even if it's completely useless, all this entails is that White is really playing as Black. A good strategy for Black is just to play 1...Nf6 (a move that he'll almost always want to play anyway before long) and wait to see what White does next.
In contrast, 1.h3 does weaken White's Kingside somewhat. However, Black may not be able to profit from this straightaway, and he should refrain from over-ambitious reactions that might enable White to justify his eccentric opening. So in this instance too I would play 1...Nf6, and wait to see what White does next.
70 ( +1 | -1 ) de KlerkBecause it creates a weakness near the king, 1. .. h3 is less suitable to be a waiting move than 1. a3. But there are two other possibilities : the first is it can transpose into the Grob after 2. g4, and for that reason 1. .. Nf6 (creating a target for the g4 pawn) cannot be recommended. Secondly the move h3 is useful in Queen pawns opening with Bf4 since the bishop can drop back to h2. About 1.a3 2.h3 this is the "Double de Klerk". Michael Basman has tried this several times (in 1990 the British Championship as well as in the Leicester Open at the same year), using the system with both colours. His third move mostly was 3.c4 ( or 3. .. c5 if playing with black). In nearly all games the opponent pushed his e- en d- pawns.
79 ( +1 | -1 ) 1.a3!? or 1.h3!?I think that these moves have nothing wrong with them, they are subtle strategy moves, "Shadow Boxing" an unprepared opponent into showing thier hand too soon. Though I know little about the idead's behind them I have played against them once or twice and I try to create positions where the moves 1.a3!? or 1.h3!? are of lesser importance and may waste a tempo so I have an equal game or try to get a slight advantage. It is hard for me to remember as it was so long ago but I think I tried to steer the game into a kind of Grunfeld position. I agree with philaretus that 2.g4!? would make the game very interesting though I would not go as far as to say it was daft? nightwalker.
34 ( +1 | -1 ) nightwalkerYou are absolutely right. But I think it's very hard (surely playing OTB) to force an opening in which 1.a3 or 1.h3 may waste a tempo. As soon as black does a move, white has a target and can adapt his opening on it. In an exagerated way, you could say that 1.e4 is a bad move, because it is not an development move, and it puts an undefended pawn in the middle of the board where it can be attacked.
2 ( +1 | -1 ) 1.e4Is not a development move?
9 ( +1 | -1 ) 1.Nf3or 1.Nc3 are development moves. 1.e4 or 1.d4 are pawn moves that serve to help develop the pieces.
22 ( +1 | -1 ) I dare not answer.....1.e4 is a bad move? "I cover my eyes so that I can see no evil" 2.pawns are only to serve to develope the pieces? "I cover my ears so that I can hear no evil" Do you have any more knowledge you wish to pass on Master keiserpaul............
15 ( +1 | -1 ) ..."Nf3 or 1.Nc3 are development moves. 1.e4 or 1.d4 are pawn moves that serve to help develop the pieces."
= Development moves? :-)
Heheh ok just joking.
But if 1.e4 is bad...how can 1.a3/h3 be good? Or 1.h3 2.g4?
23 ( +1 | -1 ) Pawns that is the question..?I think The Great Phillidor would have had a lot to say about pushing pawns! They assist in development that is true but they are also the sole of chess.........without the little DUDES there would be no Strategy! :)
And before anyone points it out, yes I know - technically - pawn isnt a piece :-)
22 ( +1 | -1 ) nightwalkerWhy are you twisting my words ? 1. I say "in an exagerated way" and you "could". 2. I never say pawns are "only" ... I stop this discussion. It's clear that some people do not understand that the first rule in chess is that there are no rules.
85 ( +1 | -1 ) Rule-Independence!Totally agree with this assessment, keiserpaul. Secrets of Modern Chess Strategy by IM John Watson focuses heavily on this modern approach to chess, which relies on concrete analysis and shuns the blind following of mere principles.
Probably my overall favorite chess book out of about 25 great books.
Although in my analysis, 1.a3 is still an inferior move...;) but not a BAD move. White can still play a decent game of chess based on his 1.a3 approach and there is nothing losing about this move, but white will have a much harder time forcing an advantage. Still, it is an OKAY move, which I know is what you were trying to point out, but everyone who blindly follows principles didn't understand...;)
32 ( +1 | -1 ) KeiserpaulPlease dont take it so seriously...if you challenge the known theory and so called "principles" (pls let me point out "principle" does not equal "rule") chess players have developed during centuries, you can expect some people to disagree :-)
After all, isnt that one reason why you consider "unorthodox" openings so interesting?
5 ( +1 | -1 ) peppe_lNo hard feelings at all. Take a beer from me !