48 ( +1 | -1 ) Weird OpeningOpening with 1.f3 is called the Barnes Opening and to quote ChessOps:
"White's King's Bishop's Pawn opening push is a dubious move, and was only given its name as a parallel to the Barnes Defence. Although the move can support the centre it exposes the king to the danger of an early attack. There is always a great risk when advancing a KBP too soon. Fools Mate is a good (if rather theoretical) example!"
40 ( +1 | -1 ) 1. f3, 2. Kf2 has on occasion been seen in GM-level play with mixed results (GM Schiller to name one example). In basic premise the f3 pawn prevents the Black Kingside Knight from advancing, & the King advancing to f2 allows the Queen & Kingside Rook to link up. In proceeding from 2. Kf2: 3. e3, 4. Ne2, 5. g3, 6. Bg2 with d4 or c4 following. It's more than a bit passive, so gambiteers & similarly-aggressive players would not do well to try it.
54 ( +1 | -1 ) SchillerIf I am not mistaken, Schiller is not a GM, but only an NM (national master) or perhaps an FM as mentioned by bogg. Eric Schiller is the author of many chess books, liked by some, disliked by others.
The "opening" 1.f3 followed by 2.Kf2 is known as the "Hammerschlag"; some years ago, a mysterious blitz player at Internet Chess Club had great success with it against Grandmasters; this led GM Nigel Short to believe that the mysterious player was none less than Bobby Fischer.
29 ( +1 | -1 ) Mmmhmmnnn...<sfinks> The very Schiller I was referring (I still find myself confusing FM, NM, GM from time to time--especially when tired). This doesn't strike me as an opening Fischer would even try (though I have at least 1 or 2 games where he played 1. b4), but I could be wrong.
44 ( +1 | -1 ) tparker Re: Tumbleweed OpeningI believe this opening comes about from the King's Gambit:
1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Kf2 Qh4+ 4.g3 fxg3 5.Kg2 gxh3 6.Rxh3 Qxe4+ 7.Nf3 d5 8.Nc3 Qg6 9.Kh1 Bg4 10.Rg2 Qh5 11.Kg1 Bxf3 12.Be2 Bxe2 13.Rxe2+ and Black will loose his Queen. (as per the famous poem published in the Ohio Chess Bulletin for December 1960, by an anonymos author.)
A book i have on the kings gambit (written by Eric Schiller) calls that variation the Drunken King gambit and in a note says it "is known in Nebraska as " the tumbleweed"". So i suppose it just depends on where your from and what you call things.......
45 ( +1 | -1 ) NameIn Schiller's long list of openings, I find the following entry:
Source: Caxton Named Opening List Thursday, June 10, 2004 3:39 PM compiled by Eric Schiller (www.ericschiller.com)
Most other sources give it the same name, e.g. Bookup calls it the Hammerschlag, with alternative names Fried Fox and Pork Chop Opening.
The Tumbleweed Gambit is King's Gambit Accepted with 3.Kf2.
9 ( +1 | -1 ) I made a topic here for the Fried Fox defence a half hour ago, wondering where it is now..
59 ( +1 | -1 ) Weird OpeningTo answer the question : "What is the actual idea behind whites opening ?" I think its mainly psychological ! We've all been told the move is bad so, it invites a quick and "justified" refutation right ! There lies the trap. White hopes for Black to overextend and become vulnerable to counterattacks. What you have to ask yourself when confronted by such moves is ... "Do i see a clear path to a durable advantage or even a win." Well, if the answer is no then, the best policy is to better your position without compromising it. They expect you to beat yourself, make them work for it instead.
49 ( +1 | -1 ) I think black or white should offer a knight or bishop early in the game to break white's pawn structure when the opponent plays a hammerschlag / fried fox. It's all for a better game.. you can win the material back later on in the game. if the pawns are away, the structure is destroyed and things can only get worse.
I haven't tested it yet, because I never played 'against' someone using that openings but this is one of the things I hope my opponent wouldn't do when played it myself. :)