www.achmaz.ir
Persian Opening
Sort:
ممنون
mamnoon
i've never seen this opening- interesting
Nc6 followed by d6 or d5 seems go
i cant speak for others, but i personally find it interesting
uhohspaghettio wrote:
Well as expected, Houdini hugely hates every single one of those moves because they don't make any sense (apart from black's Nf6 which at least has some legitimacy). If you find something completely random interesting then I feel sorry for you.
What does Houdini want for black's response?
Oct 1, 2012
0
#8
I would never answer 1.c3 with 1...c5, so I'll never have to worry about this, as I'd never play this garbage as White!
pfren wrote:
I would never expect someone feeding this "opening" to Houdini to judge its validity.
Which engine did you use then?
(lol :D)
Oh, life is full of surprises
(thankfully)
pfren wrote:
Eseles wrote:
Which engine did you use then?
Houftini.
ROFLMAO!!! :D :D
Eseles wrote:
pfren wrote:
Eseles wrote:
Which engine did you use then?
Houftini.
ROFLMAO!!! :D :D
Hah- the little-known Persian version!
uhohspaghettio wrote:
It is not interesting, it is not an opening.
How the hell is it "interesting"? Any random moves on the chessboard would be called "interesting" by some of you nimrods.
I agree. If i make moves like this:
It will not become a famous opening.
lol i dont see the big deal at all- his comments were so flagrant that i really never cared about what he was saying in terms of the opening- which was sort of the point rather than ignoring his random spasm attack
AnthonyCG wrote:
uhohspaghettio wrote:
It is not interesting, it is not an opening.
How the hell is it "interesting"? Any random moves on the chessboard would be called "interesting" by some of you nimrods.
agreed
jrzmath99 wrote:
Nc6 followed by d6 or d5 seems go
Looks very Grob-y for White. Dat aint good. Take it from the "master". And Black can certainly do better against that move order.
The first move 1.c3 is called the Saragossa Opening, because it became popular in the Saragossa Chess Club in Spain, around 1919. This opening was tested in a Fixed OpeningTournament at Mannheim, Germany, in 1922. One source mentioned Tarrasch, Leonhardt and Mieses as as participants, but I am not sure. Anyhow this opening is not that popular !
Revised Persian Openings:
This is a facinating opening. Totally new and original. There are so many openings and defences with their special names and titles in the ancient books of "Shatrang-Nameh" (Chess Book in Pahlavi or middle Persian language). This book was later named "Shatranj-Nameh".
The openings and defences such as "Iranian Attack", "Cyrus Opening", "Parthian Defence" etc. are new ones yet to be explored.
[COMMENT DELETED]
uhohspaghettio wrote:
I've said it five months ago and I'll say it again: it's NOT fascinating. There's nothing fascinating or interesting about it. By calling such an opening that, you're proving that you're just bluffing and don't really understand chess at all.
"totally new and original", "yet to be explored".... you could say that about 99% of the first six or eight half-moves of the game of chess.
I'm just tired of seeing every opening being called "fascinating", the "fascinating king's gambit" has merit. The "fascinating smith-morra" not so much. The "fascinating queen's gambit" - yes, but you'll only fully appreciate it if you're 2500+. The "fascinating london system"... yeah right. And this opening that just breaks all the rules of openings and handicaps both players without any play on either side is a joke and is NOT FASCINATING, it's ridiculous. I guess simple things are fascinating to simple minds.
Chess is infinite. If this is true then Chess could not be limited to mainstream openings and defences.