chess.com analysis vs lichess analysis • page 4/4 • General Chess Discussion • lichess.org

This is not at all a good argument. The Englund gambit is simultaneously a book move and a bad move. Neither Lichess or chess.com is wrong here, and you can't use this to prove one is better than the other.
I agree. The Englund is an opening that relies 99% of the time on traps. Engines don't fall for traps, that's why I don't use engines often in the opening. But if your opponent is aware of the traps or doesn't land on them, you won't get a playable position anymore.

@sgtlaugh said in #30: > This is not at all a good argument. The Englund gambit is simultaneously a book move and a bad move. Neither Lichess or chess.com is wrong here, and you can't use this to prove one is better than the other. I agree. The Englund is an opening that relies 99% of the time on traps. Engines don't fall for traps, that's why I don't use engines often in the opening. But if your opponent is aware of the traps or doesn't land on them, you won't get a playable position anymore.