Bong cloud opening

@Rapid167 said in #1:
> I am practising my bong cloud opening, and am finding it hard to improve beyond 1730 in bullet and blitz (I have played it 70 times in a row I think) using only this opening.

This may be because you are deliberately starting your games with a huge handicap by playing a move like 2.Ke2 at all. If you're serious about wanting to improve your game you need to choose openings which don't hand a huge advantage to your opponent and leave you fighting to survive right from the start.

I'm not a bullet player so maybe what I say misses some huge point. But my recommendation is nevertheless: start the game by establishing a pawn centre, developing knights and bishops, and castling your king into safety.

In the tools tab there is a tab for openings. You can set the rating level and see the different lines to your moves. It just another way to see it visually then the opening book as you review the games.

lichess.org/opening/Bongcloud_Attack/e4_e5_Ke2

Hallo

Hallo rapid!

An interesting game I found in my archive. The opponent's name speaks for itself lol

This opening are popular now: lichess.org/FvyuXeOF/black#49

This is also popular: lichess.org/pxrsyeMw

Dear CorvusMellori,

Thank you for your detailed response. In regard to your proposed move against the scandinavian: it is quite reasonable, however, I believe transposing from the bongcloud into a pseudo 'transvestite opening' is against the spirit of the bongcloud - perhaps I am wrong. I will certainly practice the transvestite opening after I have more experience with the bongcloud, since it seems like a fairly good opening.

Surprisingly I've won both times in the bongoscandi with 3.f3, despite this having, as you say, no compensation. It does have some control of the centre, does it not, with better tempo. The king can become an asset in some lines where pieces are traded off.

In your second response: in a bongoscandi one can hope for something like 1. e4 d5 2. Ke2 dxe4 3. Nc3 Bg4+ 4. f3 exf3+ 5. Nxf3 Bxf3+ 6. Kxf3. Typically I am tryi to get the king out with the assistance of the enemy taking nearby pieces. Surprisingly one is quite safe, even in this position.

1. e4 d5 2. Ke2 dxe4 3. Qe1 (3. f3 exf3+ 4. Nxf3) (3. Ke3) (3. Nc3 Bg4+ 4. f3 exf3+ 5. Nxf3 Bxf3+ 6. Kxf3) 3... Nf6 4. Kd1

I will get back to your response more properly after some further experimentation with suggested lines.

Best Wishes,
Ted

Dear @Brian-E,

I could very well be totally wrong about this, but I believe that a very powerful learning strategy is to undertake periods of 'searching the state space of possible actions'. Putting this otherwise - to ensure one does not fall into a skill plateau, one should deliberately go through periods of pure exploration, and working under artificially imposed constraints. Once one lifts these constraints, they will go through a period of consolidating what abnormal strategies they have learned, with what are actually sound principles. It is also much more enjoyable, which helps one play more.

I hope this makes some sense.

Kindest Regards,
Ted

@Rapid167 said in #19:
> Dear @Brian-E,
>
> I could very well be totally wrong about this, but I believe that a very powerful learning strategy is to undertake periods of 'searching the state space of possible actions'. Putting this otherwise - to ensure one does not fall into a skill plateau, one should deliberately go through periods of pure exploration, and working under artificially imposed constraints. Once one lifts these constraints, they will go through a period of consolidating what abnormal strategies they have learned, with what are actually sound principles. It is also much more enjoyable, which helps one play more.
>
> I hope this makes some sense.
>
> Kindest Regards,
> Ted

Yes, that can be a learning strategy. It's a bit like learning to play tennis by seeing what happens when you deliberately and consistently serve with a high lob and observing how the opponent smashes the ball back. It might be worthwhile learning like that for a short time, seeing how your poor service gets dealt with by a competent opposing player. After a while of that you might want to see how your opponents respond to a service which skims the net at speed instead.

I was responding to your initial question about why you find it "hard to improve beyond 1730 in bullet and blitz" while adopting this opening consistently, and my suggested reason is that you're playing a bad opening.