Talk:Anderssen's Opening

The pawn on a3 often proves useful

Of course it is true that it's "premature" to play a3 on move one; nevertheless, in my experience one gets full or near full value from 1.a3 in many or most cases, not in some (as stated in the article).

1.a3 e5 2.c4 transposes into a line which is quite reasonable for White.

1.a3 d5 2.d4 (or 2.Nf3 followed by e3 and d4) with the idea of playing a delayed Reversed Queen's Gambit Accepted with a full extra tempo.

1.a3 c5 2.c4 (2.e4 is of course also possible) and if Black plays closed then White plays as in the Symmetrical variation and the move 1.a3 has full value (as it prepares the thrust b4 following g3, Bg2, Nc3 and Rb1), whereas if Black plays open (i.e. ...Nf6 and ...d5) White is again playing a reversed system a full tempo up (by playing Nf3, cd: and e3).

Often White can play a Benoni a full tempo up.

1....g6 (as given in Nunn) is therefore logical; making use of 1.a3 is then problematic so far as I presently know (going into an English or a reversed King's Indian are reasonable ideas, but it's not even plausible that the move 1.a3 will necessarily prove useful).

In the article, the value of 1.a3 for White is somewhat understated. For many players at club level, who want to avoid studying masses of opening variations, 1.a3 can often be very useful because in many cases Black's first move will be e5 or d5 or c5 thus allowing White to play a strong Black defence as a mirror image i.e Sicilian or Kings Indian etc which will compensate for the loss of a tempo with 1.a3. Also this strategy bypasses the need to understand the vast array of defences that might be encountered if as White, you start with 1.e4 or 1.d4.78.150.221.248 (talk) 21:58, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

I have to wonder if anyone has ever addressed the response 1...a6. It seems definitely in the spirit of White's opening. ("You go first." "No, you go first!") A plausible continuation among jokers might be 2.h3 h6. Double sharp (talk) 08:48, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

I cannot find anything on the Spider sense gambit

i have a feeling it is fake AnonRed96 (talk) 05:24, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Just deleted it. Helicopter Helicopter Helicopter (talk) 15:54, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

I can still easily replicate it via just going to a previous version of the article. And, no, you don't need the Wayback Machine, because it's already an official Wikipedia feature. Helicopter Helicopter Helicopter (talk) 15:56, 2 April 2024 (UTC)