Preston Ware opening.
Or not.
When I do stuff like the following, notated below, i.e. open with a side-of-the-board pawn, I'm not actually following anything I've formally seen before. It's not like, say, King's Gambit, where there are actual books written about this crap.
I think this has the name of "Ware Opening" only because one day I made a move like this on chess.com and the site TOLD me an opening like that is called the Ware Opening. It could have been moving the pawn on the other side that has that name. I'll have to check.
I sometimes wonder if I've had success with this, playing as White, and it's counterpart, the Ware Defense, which is played when you're Black, because the opponent thinks no one would seriously open in such a way if they wanted to win.
Whether that's it or not, though this game is actually against a lower-ranked, I think the "joke" openings have netted me my most impressive wins on all the chess forums I've visited:
[WhiteElo "1814"]
[BlackElo "1726"]
[PlyCount "35"]
1. h4 {[%emt 0:0:4]} e5 {[%emt 0:0:4]} 2. h5 {[%emt 0:0:1]} Nf6 {[%emt 0:0:6]} 3. d3 {[%emt 0:0:6]} d6 {[%emt 0:0:4]} 4. h6 {[%emt 0:0:3]} g6 {[%emt 0:0:6]} 5. Bg5 {[%emt 0:0:5]} Be7 {[%emt 0:0:5]} 6. Nf3 {[%emt 0:0:19]} Bg4 {[%emt 0:0:10]} 7. Nfd2 {[%emt 0:0:5]} Nbd7 {[%emt 0:0:13]} 8. f3 {[%emt 0:0:12]} Be6 {[%emt 0:0:3]} 9. f4 {[%emt 0:0:10]} Ng4 {[%emt 0:0:21]} 10. Bxe7 {[%emt 0:0:7]} Qxe7 {[%emt 0:0:4]} 11. Nc3 {[%emt 0:0:42]} 0-0-0 {[%emt 0:0:8]} 12. Nde4 {[%emt 0:0:10]} exf4 {[%emt 0:0:8]} 13. Qd2 {[%emt 0:0:6]} d5 {[%emt 0:0:9]} 14. Nb5 {[%emt 0:0:18]} Kb8 {[%emt 0:0:12]} 15. Qa5 {[%emt 0:0:4]} a6 {[%emt 0:0:27]} 16. Qxc7+ {[%emt 0:0:5]} Ka8 {[%emt 0:0:5]} 17. Ned6 {[%emt 0:0:21]} axb5 {[%emt 0:0:48]} 18. Qxb7# {[%emt 0:0:3]Mate} 1-0
Won't bore with too many details; marching my pawn up the h-file like you see above tells my opponent he should think about castling on the OTHER side of the board, if at all. Because it tells him I'm only minimally concerned about defending myself, since I'm scrapping the game's biggest single defensive strategy (castling) for all-out attack.
It's sort of like the chess equivalent of getting rid of an ice hockey goalie in favor of having 6 and not 5 offensive shooters on the ice.
In response to my moving my queen, deciding that I myself should make ready to castle queenside now that my main offensive failed, my opponent attacks one of my Knights. I ignore it, and resolutely move my other knight to b5.
This leaves my other knight on e4 free for the taking ...
... yet if you look at the second scan above, you'll note my opponent
does NOT take that free hanging piece. He instead moves his King, as if worried for HIS safety, though I'm the one with the obvious unprotected prize sitting there, right? Does he have legit cause for so much concern he'd pass up a free piece like that.
Yes.
Novices, listen well:
Queens are powerful, and when starting out you want to watch out for their movements. But at the next highest level, it's the men on horseback you need to keep track of, since she, by herself, is a threat most learn to deal with early on.
If you see a knight cross the halfway point of the board, be cautious.
That's generally more cause for concern than a queen movement.
If you see someone ignore a hanging piece to advance their KNIGHT on you, though, AFTER the movement of a piece like their Queen?
Duck and cover.
Unless you have solid position, or really great skill, that's not an idle threat.
When your opponent moves like that, he means to take you OUT, and quickly.
Log of a recent game against a lower-ranked.
Notable for illustration of knight/queen advancement as an alarm to pay attention to -- even, or possibly especially, when the knight gets captured along the way ...
[WhiteElo "1700"]
[BlackElo "1854"]
[PlyCount "24"]
1. e4 {[%emt 0:0:4]} Nf6 {[%emt 0:0:2]} 2. Nc3 {[%emt 0:0:2]} e5 {[%emt 0:0:7]} 3. Nf3 {[%emt 0:0:5]} Nc6 {[%emt 0:0:8]} 4. Bb5 {[%emt 0:0:10]} Bb4 {[%emt 0:0:3]} 5. a3 {[%emt 0:0:10]} Bc5 {[%emt 0:0:11]} 6. 0-0 {[%emt 0:0:29]} Ng4 {[%emt 0:0:9]} 7. d3 {[%emt 0:0:54]} h5 {[%emt 0:0:7]} 8. h3 {[%emt 0:0:16]} a6 {[%emt 0:0:35]} 9. Bc4 {[%emt 0:0:16]} Qe7 {[%emt 0:0:22]} 10. hxg4 {[%emt 0:0:7]} hxg4 {[%emt 0:0:2]} 11. Nh2 {[%emt 0:0:7]} Qh4 {[%emt 0:0:4]} 12. Qxg4 {[%emt 0:0:45]} Qxh2# {[%emt 0:0:3]Mate} 0-1
As always, clearing away the gobbledygook of the time stamps gives us the standard notation any chess association would record these moves in.
Note, again, White taking his turn, followed by Black taking his turn, is how each move is counted.
[WhiteElo "1700"]
[BlackElo "1854"]
[PlyCount "24"]
1. e4 Nf6
2. Nc3 e5
3. Nf3 Nc6
4. Bb5 Bb4
5. a3 Bc5
6. 0-0 Ng4
7. d3 h5
8. h3 a6
9. Bc4 Qe7
10. hxg4 hxg4
11. Nh2 Qh4
12. Qxg4 Qxh2#
0-1
Whether playing as Black OR White, I've been finding what results when I move my Knight as my first move very interesting. In most cases, regardless of their ranking, they start chasing it around the board, as if "Catch the Horse!" were a fun mini-game. It's actually relatively sound to do that if you can do it correctly; a player continually moving one piece is generally neglecting their development everywhere else.
Here, though, my opponent doesn't attack my horse immediately by advancing the pawn again. Instead, he uses his own knight to defend it, and, when I advance my own king pawn, forward, attacks THAT with his OTHER knight, which I dutifully defend.
I've yet to properly check it out, but, if memory serves me correctly, there's actually an opening called "The Four Knights". I'm fairly certain the above is it.
If the sequence is out of order, I wager players still arrive at this same position.
There's a remarkable symmetry to the board up until move #5, where White moves up his Queen's Rook pawn to chase my bishop away. He immediately castles thereafter, then quite understandably moves his KING's Rook pawn up to chase my knight away:
I respond by now moving MY Queen's Rook pawn up, to chase away HIS bishop.
The symmetry now is extraordinary. I didn't fully realize it until re-examining these scans to text this message. The forces on the Queenside of our board form a near perfect mirror image:
At any rate, in response to his moving his bishop to safety, I move my queen up, ostensibly, and to some extent, perhaps, in reality, to guard the f7 square, the pawn currently on it, and my king.
Otherwise my king MIGHT soon find himself the target of a coordinated assault that begins with that recently chased-away-bishop then kamikaze-ing into f7, and my King having to take that bishop, and my opponent then following by moving his knight to attack the king, creating space and initiative for his QUEEN to come down, whereupon things might get REALLY ugly for me.
Of course, since I had a relatively valuable piece under attack before I decided to take this ostensible defensive move, that piece, my knight, is now forfeit:
Mores the pity ...
Actually, there's no pity.
My opponent's capture of my knight with his King's Rook pawn, is my chance to take his pawn with MY King's Rook pawn in return, and open up that h-column.
My opponent moves his knight out of the way, to apparent safety, further up and onto said h-column, but this is exactly what I want ...
... because when that knight moves, it leaves the square h4 unguarded for my queen to occupy. At this point the game is effectively over. My opponent tries to bring up his own queen, perhaps hoping to distract me, but i neglected castling and baited him for a reason, and the time stamp tells me he knows it:
Queen takes knight. Checkmate, and good game.
GUTSHOT
A straight completed from "inside" by one possible card. For example, if your pocket cards are 5 and 6 and the flop shows 4-8-king, a 7 and only a 7 on the turn or river would complete your "gutshot" straight. It is the opposite of an open-ended straight, which is completed by any one of two cards from the outside. A gutshot is half as likely to hit as an open-ended straight.
