Crazyhouse Opening Theory

if "Chess is 99% tactic" as stated Richard TEICHMANN, I'd say "Crazyhouse is 99.99% tactic" ;-) ;

Haha while I don't necessarily agree when the quote is used for regular chess, I do think it's an apt description of crazyhouse. In crazyhouse, even the positional moves (don't weaken X square) are used to avoid a direct tactical threat (because he or she might put a pawn there).

In crazyhouse, attack is so fast that "don't weaken X square" can be solve by tactic. It's the same in chess but way slower.
"positional" ideas are shortcuts to no compute complex tactical combinations.
For 20 years, computers show to human more and more clearly that chess is mainly a tactical game. Now, no GM is able to prepare an opening without computer because they know they are blind in tactic even they are good positional players.

@Konadios: A preliminary analysis of the Crosky gambit accepted shows that it is losing. I found a move that no one has even tried on lichess, so that seems quite interesting. I will definitely analyze it in much more detail and post the analysis soon enough; first I have to finish another line I'm analyzing in-depth.

@DoubleYou: Very brilliant remark! Yes, that's why I said, "to avoid a DIRECT tactical threat." Indeed, in regular chess, positional moves aid the stronger side to avoid long-term tactics as well. Thanks for your reply!

Crosky Gambit Accepted* (I'm such a prig).

Here are some engines games with the Crosky gambit (Join the Crazyhouse Engine Development and Game Analyses team: http://en.lichess.org/team/crazyhouse-engine-development-and-game-analyses !):

(Taken from this post: http://en.lichess.org/forum/team-crazyhouse-engine-development-and-game-analyses/engine-matches-on-long-tc?page=2#11)

http://en.lichess.org/1rgdAcEa
http://en.lichess.org/33kvknX1
http://en.lichess.org/DBPj7q6q
http://en.lichess.org/MAVlQch7
http://en.lichess.org/Gsyd5PEq
http://en.lichess.org/ZdHQgu10
http://en.lichess.org/6i6vXrDX
http://en.lichess.org/zpmYkTSx

Some eval with 3 best moves after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.d3 Nf6 5.o-o o-o 6.Nc3 after 8h30m, best move is h6 but -2.11 score.
Is it already losing ? I think so !

Position : fr.lichess.org/analysis/crazyhouse/r1bq1rk1/pppp1ppp/2n2n2/2b1p3/2B1P3/2NP1N2/PPP2PPP/R1BQ1RK1_b_-_-_11_2

Summary
score cp -258 pv c5e7 c3d5 d7d6 d5e7 d8e7 B@h4 c8g4 c1g5 N@d7
score cp -326 pv d7d6 c1g5 g8h8 c3d5 f6d5 g5d8 N@e3 d1c1 c8g4
score cp -211 pv h7h6 c3d5

Log :
<< info depth 32 seldepth 57 multipv 1 score cp -258 nodes 204711418924 nps 6708336 hashfull 999 tbhits 0 time 30515975 pv c5e7 c3d5 d7d6 d5e7 d8e7 B@h4 c8g4 c1g5 N@d7 c2c3 g8h8 h2h3 g4e6 g5f6 g7f6 N@d5 e6d5 c4d5 B@e6 B@h6 f8g8 d5e6 f7e6 B@h5 B@f7 h5g4 g8g6 h6e3 N@f4 f3e1 a8g8 d3d4 e5d4 e3f4 P@g5 c3d4 g5f4 P@h5
<< info depth 32 seldepth 57 multipv 2 score cp -326 nodes 204711418924 nps 6708336 hashfull 999 tbhits 0 time 30515975 pv d7d6 c1g5 g8h8 c3d5 f6d5 g5d8 N@e3 d1c1 c8g4 f3g5 e3f1 c1f1 a8d8 c4d5 B@g6 Q@g3 R@f6 N@h4 g4h5 N@f5 g6f5 h4f5 f6f5 e4f5 N@f4 g3h4 N@g4 B@g3 g4f2 g3f4 f2d3 g1h1 d3f4 f1f4 e5f4 h4h5 P@h6 g5f7 f8f7 h5f7
<< info depth 31 seldepth 57 multipv 3 score cp -211 nodes 204711418924 nps 6708336 hashfull 999 tbhits 0 time 30515975 pv h7h6 c3d5

My personal conclusion is that e4 e5 is a loss for Black because the line you posted is basically forced (and it does seem to be lost, yes). :)

Did you conclude that starting position is a white win yet? Let's prove it in 2017! :P

I don't know if this was meant in jest, LOL, but I've been analyzing e4 e5 for well over 7 months now. I can confirm Vinvin's findings. Of course, it's not a proof in the antichess sense, but I haven't found a good line for Black yet. All lines have holes in them.

Other responses to e4 I don't really know about. I think the French will not be easy at all to crack.