So what are some scenarios (preferably in the opening) where your opponent looks like in disadvantage yet is totally fine?
Driving the opponent to apparently lost positions is kinda funny because often they start playing weird because they think they're losing. It's sorta like a psychological trick.
For instance, I love doing this dumb fork on the four knights as black:
1. e4, e5; 2. Nf3, Nf6; 3. Nc3, Nc6; 4. Bc4, Nxe4; 5. Nxe4, d5
A lot of players think you just blundered a knight and grab it without thinking and "fall" to this fork, which turns out to just be a trade. The thing is: it looks like white has to give the bishop pair and thus make black slightly better. I've seen cases of players not willing to give the B and playing a move like Bb3 out of desperation. Then I grabbed the knight and let a pawn on e4. And they kept not challenging the pawn because otherwise I'd trade and they'd be a pawn down. This compromised their development a lot, because without oving any pawns to challenge e4 the pieces may get a bit stuck back there.
To cite another example, I like a lot this line on the symmetrical london as black:
1. d4, d5; 2. Bf4, Bf5; 3. e3, e6; 4. Nf3, Nf6; 5.c4, Bxb1; 6. Rxb1 (or Qxb1), Bb4+; and now if 7. Nd2, then black wins a piece with Ne4. However the only way left to get out of check is moving the king.
Often you'd think giving up a bishop pair for the right to castle would be winning, but it turns out in this scenario white is fine, since the king is not too much exposed and the most worrying diagonal was white, and black's white B is gone, so the king and may stay in the middle of the board for the rest of the game without too much worry.
It still makes a lot of players try to defend with the knight, tho.
So what are some other lines which look like winning but really aren't?
Driving the opponent to apparently lost positions is kinda funny because often they start playing weird because they think they're losing. It's sorta like a psychological trick.
For instance, I love doing this dumb fork on the four knights as black:
1. e4, e5; 2. Nf3, Nf6; 3. Nc3, Nc6; 4. Bc4, Nxe4; 5. Nxe4, d5
A lot of players think you just blundered a knight and grab it without thinking and "fall" to this fork, which turns out to just be a trade. The thing is: it looks like white has to give the bishop pair and thus make black slightly better. I've seen cases of players not willing to give the B and playing a move like Bb3 out of desperation. Then I grabbed the knight and let a pawn on e4. And they kept not challenging the pawn because otherwise I'd trade and they'd be a pawn down. This compromised their development a lot, because without oving any pawns to challenge e4 the pieces may get a bit stuck back there.
To cite another example, I like a lot this line on the symmetrical london as black:
1. d4, d5; 2. Bf4, Bf5; 3. e3, e6; 4. Nf3, Nf6; 5.c4, Bxb1; 6. Rxb1 (or Qxb1), Bb4+; and now if 7. Nd2, then black wins a piece with Ne4. However the only way left to get out of check is moving the king.
Often you'd think giving up a bishop pair for the right to castle would be winning, but it turns out in this scenario white is fine, since the king is not too much exposed and the most worrying diagonal was white, and black's white B is gone, so the king and may stay in the middle of the board for the rest of the game without too much worry.
It still makes a lot of players try to defend with the knight, tho.
So what are some other lines which look like winning but really aren't?
