56 ( +1 | -1 ) Van't Kruijs - 1. e3Recently I have been getting the urge to begin learning some of the more "irregular" openings of chess. After searching around certain chess websites, I decided to look at the Van't Kruijs opening: 1. e3.
I was wondering if anybody might have some helpful information about this opening (outside of don't do it... hehe). The only line coming from this opening that I could find was the Amsterdam Attack (1. e3 e5 2. c4 d6 3. Nc3 Nc6 4. b3 Nf6). Is there any other option that you people might know of?
If you play 1.e3 and your opponent answer 1...e4, and you like to respond 1.e4 with 1...e5, then I recommend you to play 2.e4. After this, you will be playing an 1.e4 e5 opening with the colours reversed. This could be very disappointing for your opponent if he is a 1.d4, 1.c4, 1.Nf3 or 1.g3 player.
34 ( +1 | -1 ) Not to be recommended...I don't think that e3 should be recommended to anyone as the first move. It completely gives up any initial advantage White may claim, for no logical reason. I would suggest playing either c4, d4,e4,nf3 and saving your transition into an irregular opening after that. Personally, I would love it as black if my opponents started with e3.
16 ( +1 | -1 ) ReverseBut some people play French defence (and win using it!). 1. e3 isn't worse than French! . To continue... Some people play 1. ... e6 after 1. d4; 1. c4; 1. Nf3, 1. g3 .... what else? ;-)
39 ( +1 | -1 ) 1.e3isn't a bad move in itself, it's just that it gives black a greater freedom of choice than necessary and can make development of white's queenbishop problematic. If white ends up playing a reverse favourable variation of the french with a move in hand, then his first move has been vindicated - but it is very unlikely that black would allow that to happen!