chess against computer

Chess Against Computer

Tag and you will uncover!
Nutty name, real interests
[ Sign up | Log in | Guest ] (beta)
onlygb 93 ( +1 | -1 )
2.Ke2 It may only work in blitz games but I have had more than a little success with 2.Ke2.

It goes against everything you've ever been taught but there's two interesting traits to abandoning your "God given right to castle" early.

1. Surprise - No one expects 2.Ke2. You have taken them out of their comfort zone.

2. Zen-like response - Because some will wilt under the confusion and others will attack wildly, tossing structure to the wind, you will be like the ocean and flow to the place where you have the advantage.

In the end game, your King is centralized and becomes a fighting piece. In the middle game, it is difficult to checkmate a king that has room to escape.

A lot of good developing moves come as a result of defending the King in this opening.

Let me know if anyone else has tried it or if I should be burned at the stake for heresy. (Well reasoned responses only, please.)
i_play_slowly 38 ( +1 | -1 )
2.Ke2 and Fischer Apparently someone who is believed to be Bobby Fischer was playing incredible blitz chess on the Internet in 2001, and one of his opening moves was 2.Ke2. For the article see:
Using Google to search for 2.Ke2 will also turn up some very interesting websites.
philaretus 18 ( +1 | -1 )
An early Ke2.... .....(albeit forced) is a feature of two variations of the King's Gambit, namely,

The Steinitz Gambit 1.e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3.d4 Qh4+ 4.Ke2,

and the Keres Gambit 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nc3 Qh4+ 4.Ke2.

So 2.Ke2 is not such an outlandish idea as it might appear.
bucklehead 102 ( +1 | -1 )
Interesting websites, indeed So I wondered whether there was actually a record of a 2. Ke2 game anywhere. First I scanned the GK database, which contains no games with white's 1. e4 and 2. Ke2 (at least against the most popular black responses to 1. e4). Neither do the Chessgames or Chessbase databases. I did find one game at Chesslab, but it's so ridiculous that I feel the participants should be banned from any future competitive chess events. See below for the moves.

Other Google results are for pages showing problems or endgame studies, where "2. Ke2" simply means the second move of the problem solution. Most interestingly, there is a listing for some games of a variant called "Progressive Orthodox Chess" in which, after the first move by white, the players alternate making two moves at a time--one for their own pieces, one for their opponent's.

So as I am inclined to say whenever I see such a public debate, where's the thematic 2. Ke2 minitournament?


[Event "RUS-ch U20"]
[Site "Samara"]
[Date "2004.03.??"]
[Round "11"]
[White "Rodchenkov,Sergey D"]
[Black "Isajevsky,Anton"]
[Result "1/2"]
[Eco "C20"]
1.Nf3 Nf6 2.Ng1 Ng8 3.Nc3 Nc6 4.Nb1 Nb8 5.e4 e5 6.Ke2 Ke7 7.Ke1 Ke8 8.d3 d6
9.a4 h5 10.a5 h4 1/2
chuckventimiglia 16 ( +1 | -1 )
I would think that Bobby Fischer could play any sort of opening moves and still
defeat most chess players. I would not recommend 2.Ke2
for us mere mortals. Chuck
More: Chess
bucklehead 113 ( +1 | -1 )
What about 3. Kf2? There is a recognized variant of the King's Gambit alternately called the "Tumbleweed" or the (this is the best part) "Drunken King" which goes 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Kf2. I suppose the move is made with similar aims in mind to 2. Ke2.

One word, if you will permit me, on the strategy of using offbeat openings to confuse and distract opponents in blitz. I see the theoretical value of getting your opponent to a) launch a speculative attack where no solid line presents itself or b) to burn time on the clock as they look for the refutation they know must exist. Not long ago there was a GK thread arguing for the use of the godawful Damiano's Defense (1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 f6?) for the same reasons. I'd never actually faced this one in play, but soon after reading the arguments, counterarguments, and insults hurled in that thread, I found myself in a 5 min blitz game against just this opening. Armed with the best line of play, I was able to move at lightning speed, and my opponent resigned after a humiliating eight moves. 2. Ke2 seems far more solid, but prepare for your victories to be offset by as many demoralizing defeats.
fmgaijin 6 ( +1 | -1 )
My Son Jeremiah's Shortest Tournament Game A cautionary tale againist indiscriminate Ke2:

NN vs. Jeremiah: 1.e4 d5 2.ed5 Qd5 3.Ke2?? Qe4 mate
i_play_slowly 107 ( +1 | -1 )
Was he Fischer? bucklehead is correct, and I was mistaken. I searched the Internet using WebFerretPRO, which is the most thorough search engine I know, but found no games that featured 2.Ke2 other than the following two. Other discoveries were similar to bucklehad's, with 2.Ke2 appearing in problems and endgame studies, not in games.
These games appear at: You can go to the website and play them there. "Beber" is the handle of IM Robert Fontaine. Some claim that "Guest 71" is Fischer.
Guest71 - Beber (2827) [B20]
ICC 3 0 u Internet Chess Club, 2001
1.e4 c5 2.Ke2 Nc6 3.Ke3 g6 4.Nc3 Nd4 5.d3 Nf6 6.Kd2 d5 7.Ke1 Bg7 8.h3 0-0 9.a3 e5 10.Bg5 Be6 11.exd5 Bxd5 12.Nxd5 Qxd5 13.c3 Ne6 14.Be3 Rad8 15.Qa4 e4 16.dxe4 Nxe4 17.Rc1 a6 18.Be2 b5 19.Qxa6 c4 20.Rd1 Qf5 21.Nf3 Nxc3 22.bxc3 Bxc3+ 23.Nd2 Nc5 24.Bxc5 Bxd2+ 25.Rxd2 Rxd2 26.Kxd2 Rd8+ 27.Kc1 Qe5 28.Bxc4 Qc3+ 29.Kb1 bxc4 30.Rc1 Qb3+ 31.Ka1 Rd2 32.Qc8+ Kg7 33.Bf8+ Kf6 34.Qc6+ Kf5 35.Qc5+ Kf6 36.Qe7+ Kf5 37.Qxf7+ Kg5 38.Be7+ Kh6 39.Qf8+ Kh5 40.g4# 1-0
(16) Guest71 - Beber (2827) [A00]
ICC 3 0 u Internet Chess Club, 24.04.2001
1.e3 d5 2.Ke2 Nf6 3.Kd3 e5 4.c4 Bf5+ 5.Ke2 Nc6 6.d3 Bc5 7.a3 a5 8.Ke1 0-0 9.cxd5 Qxd5 10.e4 Bxe4 11.Nc3 Qd4 12.Be3 Qd6 13.dxe4 Black resigns 1-0
bucklehead, if I sent you on a wild goose chase, mea culpa, mea culps, mea maxima culpa.
loreta 25 ( +1 | -1 )
2. ... f5? I now remembered I play agains it in quick game (blitz) and it wasn't easy game.
Maybe, a good practise is just to make "normal" development - Nc6, Nf6, Bc5....
But what about 2. ... f5 {it's playable after 2. Bc4, 2.Nf3 and after 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5, so it's have to be playable there too, I think...}
soikins 66 ( +1 | -1 )
Fischer I remember that tale of Fischer on the internet. I think Short said it might be Fischer. Thought I tend to agree with Mig on this one -- it was just a computer. I haven't checked the games, but Mig wrote, that he had and those where full with computermoves.

Thought myths about halfgods-halfhumans are always popular among masses. Anyway, it's sometimes funny to see Americans so obsessed with Fischer -- the greatest player of all time. Weird.

About 2. Ke2 -- don't waste your time on such crap. There are hundreds of better ways how to get your opponent out of book early in the game. Ke2 is just not worth your time.
ccmcacollister 174 ( +1 | -1 )
INdeed .... I'm with soikins & chuckventimiglia on this!
2.Ke2 is much too complex for us average players. Already this thread shows people falling into the trap of preceding their 2.Ke2 with 1.e4?! Which clearly is no better than 1.d4 2.Kd2 ?! Since both only block in two pieces while pushing forth in King Attack. By playing 1.e3! 2.Ke2 there are 3 Pieces blocked-in bye move 2!! Clearly superior surprise strategy. But in a further example of the delicate positional feel needed to play this opening properly, White must know to abandon his Piece Blocking strategy at exactly the proper moment, to play 3.Kd3 4.Ke4 & 5.Ke5 to obtain the maximum surprise shock value. Yet even this clever strategy can lead to increased complexity requiring a dearth of knowledge & flexibility should Black refuse to cooperate with the White, then WT must be prepared to abandon standard moves and achieve King to the 5th rank by carefully selecting squares which will not put him in check in order to get there. And a clever Black defender may not leave many of these, lest WT's pruissant King come to attack the ever vulnerable f7 square.
bucklehead, I'm not sure you can play The Drunken King and win. It looks similar to The Fred Opening of Black, championed by certain Lincoln Nebraska players. 1.e4 f5 2.exf5 Kf7 ... but having that extra tempo as White makes it suspect IMHO
. If I'm not missing another One MOVEr here I mean :) ??!
(Confidential: Everyone knows that 1.d3 ! 2.Kd2 is the MAx. But don't tell ; I'm trying to keep it out of D-Base for the WC !)
soikins 98 ( +1 | -1 )
Great Now you have done it, ccmcacollister you have told the esoteric Truth to everyone! Now everybody will play 1. d3! and 2. Kd2!! well, at least besides the adepts of Beginner's Game ( ) and Crazy Cat.

Well, at least I will be able to sell my great analysis of the Opening. I have spent 5 years in proving that 1. d3! followed by 2. Kd2!! wins! I have been succesfull, so these years are not wasted (if someone doubted)! My greatest work has been completed and you, ccmcacollister , have given it away to everybody (I might sue you). To all those Sicilian, KID, Ruy Lopez, QGD, QGA, Slav, Guico Piano, French, Caro etc., players? How could you!? I still hope they won't understand the treasures you have given them and will keep playing thos incorect openings and defences.
philaretus 17 ( +1 | -1 )
I must put in a word here.... .....for the Transsexual Opening, which I recommended in another thread some time ago. This runs typically:

1.e4 e5 2.Ke2 Nf6 3.Qe1 Nxe4 4.Kd1!

with the King taking the place of the Queen.
i_play_slowly 54 ( +1 | -1 )
unusual openings There is an "Unusual Chess Openings" website at: It features such colorful openings as the Rat, the Hippopotamus Defence, and the Elephant Gambit, with 60 different openings in total, plus games in which they were used.
The Clemenz Opening, 1.h4, by the way, leads to a significant percentage of victories for White in the database at, and equal chances for White and Black in the database at
wschmidt 23 ( +1 | -1 )
I'd say that at the level most of us play at, losing a tempo or even two in the opening isn't likely to determine the game, and may even be advantageous if it throws an opponent off guard. And if one is familiar with the little traps and nuances of the particular offbeat opening, there are plenty of pelts to be had.
bucklehead 194 ( +1 | -1 )
And let's keep in mind... ...that we're talking about value in blitz games. I can definitely attest that losing a tempo or two against a strong player in CC can be deadly; but in blitz the question becomes, "Is the positional weakness (or tactical opportunity) I'm creating offset by the advantage in time I may gain?" In this light, 2. Ke2 may not be so bad.

In all our chess books, there are annotations on moves along the lines of "8...Be7 is weaker here" without much expansion. Some weak moves are more obvious than others, but it's important to remember that not all weak moves are directly refutable. A tiny, throwaway remark in one of my books has left a strong impression on me. In paraphrase it went, "Move X is considered weaker than the alternatives. Of course, such a solid move can hardly be refuted by force."

2. Ke2 has a lot against it--it blocks the developmental diagonals for the Q and KB, it may make the KR more difficult to develop, and of course the K is far more exposed (and on a central file to boot) than it would otherwise be. But there is no forcing combination which, from this point, will collapse white's position. In the end, I'm for anything that works; and if you're getting good results with it in blitz, onlygb , that should be evidence enough.

PS: ccmcacollister , don't think for a moment that I'm advocating widespread use of the Drunken King or, please God no, the Fred defense (1. e4 f5). The occasional Bird is as unorthdox as I get. I would probably be more of a maverick along those lines if they hadn't made all the names so wimpy in recent years. I mean, which would you rather play, the "Grob," or "The Spike," as 1. g4 was once known. And what about 1. ...g6, the "Robatsch Defense"? I have great respect for the man, but I mean, what's cooler than playing the "Fianchetto del Rey"? And all you Pirc freaks out there would get more respect if ol' Vasja had spelled his family name "Ufimzev." I'm just saying.
onlygb 31 ( +1 | -1 )
Thematic tourney required We need a thematic 2.Ke2 (Notice I did not say 3.Ke2) tournament to test and resolve the above analysis that this is "crap."

Who among you is a prodigy of Cassia that will champion the exploration of fairly untrodden sands in the desert of Chess?

I think we owe it to Guest71.

By the way, I'm not a gambler but I'll bet White takes greater than 50% of the tournament.

georgesdimitrov 43 ( +1 | -1 )
The THEMATIC is HERE! I just started the fun: *** The (In)Famous 2.Ke2 Tourney *** needs YOU NOW!

There are 8 free slots, I put the rating range as broad as I could (1150-1750) so that anybody who feels somehow mentally ill could join the crazyness.

I didn't set the position, so the first moves could be free, but please play 1.e3 2.Ke2 or 1.e4 2.Ke2 as white! Free style for black...

I always though that chess needed a good dose of humour. :)

- Georges
georgesdimitrov 46 ( +1 | -1 )
Tournament Testing: First analysis ideas coming from the tourney: 1.e4 2.Ke2 is risky because of the possibility of 1...Nf6, attacking the unatended pawn. It can be of course considered as a gambit, which can be in turn accepted or declined. 1.e3 may be more safe.

We need to find a name for this opening, everyone: suggestions??? King's Central Attack could be an idea...

I also suggest to add open line for 1.e4 2.Ke2 and closed line for 1.e3 2.Ke2.

So 1.e4 Nf6 2.Ke2 Nxe4 would be a KCA Open, Gambit Accepted... Any toughts, anyone?

georgesdimitrov 12 ( +1 | -1 )
Actually... As 1.e4 Nf6 is the Alekhine Defence, we could call 1.e4 Nf6 2.Ke2 a KCA, Alekhine Gambit or, inversely, Alekhine Defence, KCA (or whatever else) Gambit.
ccmcacollister 132 ( +1 | -1 )
Yes I guess ... White should hope BL doesnt answer 1.e4 with ...Nf6 or d5, f5, Nc6 . . . Or that 2.Ke2 is gonnal hurt. Thats one point. Should white have to hope and wish on move ONE? On the other hand perhaps he should upon realizing he is giving up at least 3 tempos to play Ke2. This maybe a little pessimistic in assuming e2 will not become the perfect king placement or will not dissuade a black check upon the Ke2. So in the spirit of invention, lets say 2.67 tempii. Say I just realized, from prior remarks I may be construed as an advocate of the 1.e3 branch ! }8-)
Have at it fearless crusaders of Caissa !
In a serious note, well. ... anyway. Maybe we are onto something here. If just having your move #2 preplanned for WT makes for interesting transpositional thoughts ... and brings 1.e3 to outshine 1e4 (!!!) then maybe this is the means to save the royal game from stale opening tombs and crouching computers. Just toss in an opening proviso against white....saying MOVE WHAT YOU WANT BUT #7 MUST BE b3 or f4 by WT . . . (And already Bird,s Opening is gone .... or someone will have to be very creative as white to get another f4 move!) We might call this " onlygb sortofrandomChess " ! :) ))
onlygb 92 ( +1 | -1 )
1.e3 vs. 1.e4 in 2.Ke2 I think someone needs to analyze the Nf6 opening in preparation for 2.Ke2. That looks less like a gambit and more like suicide in response to 1.e4. Now, on 1.e3, I think 2.Ke2 is playable against 1...Nf6. However, I don't personally like the notion of 1.e3 when playing 2.Ke2. I much prefer to start off with 1.e4 - the reason will become obvious as we play through a few of these. The king, unable to castle is going to depend mightily on both space and (here's the KEY to the naysayers) the ability to DEVELOP NORMALLY WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY DEFENDING. That's the real secret to this opening. Sure, your King may wind up centralized and agressive in the end game (and harder to pin for a checkmate.) But the real beauty here is that you can develop normally and nullify the attack of Black. If you feel your end game is stronger than your opponent's, or you know your opponent has better mastery of opening lines, this move may be a real benefit.
peppe_l 46 ( +1 | -1 )
Question "In the end game, your King is centralized and becomes a fighting piece. In the middle game, it is difficult to checkmate a king that has room to escape."

What if you simply leave the king to e1? :-)

Then you can castle short, castle long or keep the king in the centre, depending on how the game continues. Your king has even more room to escape (because you can castle if necessary), and you can centralize it by playing Ke2 later, after surviving the opening and the middlegame.
onlygb 35 ( +1 | -1 )
Not true... A king at e2 is not "up against the wall" as is a king at e1. While it is true that a K at e1 can always move to e2 later, the whole point here is to trade off quickly and get everyone (including his majesty) off the back wall.

This is a fighting line that should lead to a very quick end game with advantage to an aggressive king not trapped in a corner.
peppe_l 69 ( +1 | -1 )
Well Of course you can hope to exchange all the pieces and win the pawn ending thanks to king being one square closer to the centre, but that's rather optimistic if you ask me :-)

"This is a fighting line that should lead to a very quick end game with advantage to an aggressive king not trapped in a corner."

Who says you have to castle? You can stay in e1. And I am not so sure about "SHOULD lead to a very quick endgame" - after all your opponent is by no means forced to play the ball and swap off all his pieces.

The thing is I haven't heard any good reason to play Ke2 _before_ activating the pieces. Why not play Nf3 first? Surely the king won't be needed in the centre any time soon. Not in move 3, anyway.
onlygb 53 ( +1 | -1 )
You can't leave your king up against a wall. Once on e2, there's no such thing as a back rank mate. You can't leave your king in a corner, either (as we've all done over and over and over.)

So, your objection seems to be the timing, not the move itself. Fine. Feel free to explore 3.Ke2 or 4.Ke2 or even 10. Ke2. The issue is that you will find it nearly impossible to waste a tempo later in the game when black has developed.

If you're going to spend the tempo putting the king on e2, you need to do it as soon as possible.
peppe_l 42 ( +1 | -1 )
... "So, your objection seems to be the timing, not the move itself."

Yes and no. You cannot say certain move is "good" or "bad" - it always depends on position on the board. Can you say whether 49.Nd5 is a good move? I certainly can't, and same applies to 10.Ke2.

"Fine. Feel free to explore 3.Ke2 or 4.Ke2 or even 10. Ke2. The issue is that you will find it nearly impossible to waste a tempo later in the game when black has developed."

Why waste a tempo in the first place? :-)

soikins 13 ( +1 | -1 )
omg You people really take this seriously. I just cite GM Gipslis:
"We with Misha do not analyse such positions."
georgesdimitrov 65 ( +1 | -1 )
Tournament Hi All!

I just wanted to say that I'll keep statistics of the opening moves and games results (% of wins/draws for each side) and I'll post them as soon as the Tournament is finished. We'll then see if there were any lines that stood out of the crowd as either exceptionnal or awful.

ccmcacollister, I agree that the transpositional toughts are very interesting. I like the onlygbsortofRandomChess idea.

Meanwhile, thanks to all who joined (still 2 places left...) and thanks to onlygb, without whom we would never have stumbled across the greatest discovery in modern chess history...

onlygb 21 ( +1 | -1 )
LOL!!! After the walloping I just took, I'm rethinking having my name associated with it in any shape or form.

Hopefully someone more savvy than I can prove the viability of this unexplored line.
jjw109 7 ( +1 | -1 )
bummer damn, no matter how hard I try I can't seem to move 2. Ke2 after I move 1. h4!
ccmcacollister 217 ( +1 | -1 )
Strategy vs 2.Ke2 I think I've settled upon what my strategy would be as Black if I played vs 2.Ke2 ...
aside from lines winning the e4 pawn on move two I mean. But with the tournament in progress I wont discuss it at this point. Especially since it involves opening of specific file(s) etc. And the nature of handling the center. But you can do the same .... just think ahead to imagine what you would like the position to look like when you have completed your development as BL. After doing so I've come to a conclusion, based upon logical considerations, rather than an analysis of specific positions, that I feel the opening is probably fatal for WT.
Of course there are often many positions that can arise and defy our logical expectations :) It might prove to be like that ... and so is an interesting new opening born! And its unorthodoxy probably does become advantageous if it is not simply unsound.
I had a game with Xerox involving 1.e4 e6 2.Qe2 C5 which is a known, but very seldom played line. (Called the Tartkower, I believe. If not then Tchigorin. I'll leave that to students of it) But indeed in that game I suprised myself by embarking upon a totally unsuitable strategy, even tho familiar with positions of that nature, just not the specifics. But I lost that badly.
And IM Keith Hayward took the Bird's opening and made it a weapon to carry him to an IM of corr title, tho he himself called it something like a Second-class opening. So I'm the first to agree there can be value in the new or novel. If it is basically sound. And I'm watching the tournament with interest. Noting so far that a number of players have chosen to avoid simply winning the e4 pawn after forcing 2.Ke2 in what must be a sporting gesture to avoid lines where the requirement of Ke2 becomes unfair to WT. To produce a more real-world situation where WT might have taken time to guard the pawn or trade it, but for the constraints of the
Mini-T. Personally, I cant see where any line gambiting the e4 pawn like that would even be non-fatal. Bad enough to gambit Any pawn without receiving at least 2 tempii & an open line for it. But THAT pawn ... don't think WT can live.