lichess.org
Donate

why do people play garbage like the fried liver?

I can already smell Mrpushwood going on about some deep philosophical issues and talking about "if you want to avoid it don't let them play it" or something like that. But seriously, the whole thing is based on some cheap trick they learnt when they were 12 and play it for the rest of their lives. I'm not saying my openings like the 4 knights or mainline open sicilians are any good, but come on man, learn some real opening! If you feel offended, I'm sorry but I had a bit of a bad day and needed to vent on the lichess forum
@TheJeromeGambit said in #4:
> not unsound, imo it's a cheap trick which kids play

you never heard that it's a fully developed system that exists at all levels, even high profiles? It may be a "trick" for something like sub-1400 if they don't know the refutation 4.... d5. You know not only that but also the continuation 5. exd5 Na5, as you say? White gets a pawn, Black gets some initiative, and it's objectively balanced. It's theory-heavy for both sides.
What to do with liver other than fry it? I, for one, will have nothing to do with boiled liver. Or baked liver.
Be glad with lazy players who just learn a couple tricks and make no effort to improve chess skills. You need limited practice to stop them and after move 5 or 8 they now don't know what to do.

Well, some find "assistance." But they burn their clock out. Play fast but don't blunder, in Rapid make them play a 50 move game and you have a 3min clock advantage. Yes hard to do in bullet/blitz. But they probably don't have time for assistance either.
Given the opportunity and in the hands of good player, the Fried Liver Attack is a very sharp weapon indeed ... that's why good players just don't allow it ... so I've been told ...
"... [After 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Nf6,] 4 Ng5 is definitely a correct move. ..." - IM Jan Pinski (2003)
"... OPENINGS OVERDUE FOR BEING REDISCOVERED
After 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 ... 3. Bc4 ... the Two Knights (3...Nf6 4. Ng5) virtually forces Black to sacrifice a [pawn]. Lots of theory nobody remembers. ..." - GM Andrew Soltis (2002)
"... there have been thousands of master games with 4 Ng5 for over a century, and several whole books have been devoted to precisely this position (not to mention lengthy parts of other books and countless articles). The main point is that, principles not-withstanding, Black has a difficult time defending f7 without making some kind of concession. ..." - IM John Watson (2006)

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.