Talk:Dunst Opening

1...a6

I removed a section on 1...a6 that said only: "If black wants to meet fire with fire (or rubbish with rubbish) s/he could try this. a6 prepares 2 ... b5 getting ready to kick the c6 knight." Reasons for removal: (1) the section gives no evidence this is a noteworthy variation (has it ever been played in a master game?) (2) it describes 1.Nc3 as "rubbish" while the rest of the article puts forward evidence that it's quite playable; (3) White's knight isn't on c6 and ...b5 doesn't attack it. In short, this section was probably just some beginner wanting to list a variation he'd tried out at his local club. 91.105.3.133 (talk) 17:26, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted your edit because it was a removal of material with no reason, except "see talk page" and there was nothing on the talk page at that time. If you delete it again, I will not change it. I leave it to others to judge, including you. Bubba73 (talk), 17:32, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see that someone, probably the above user, has removed the section again. I agree with his above-expressed sentiments. If we have a section on 1...a6, we might as well have sections on the other 15 moves we haven't mentioned. Obviously 1...g6, 1...Nc6 and lots of other moves are playable. Many are indeed stronger than 1...a6, which is likely to transpose to the Birmingham Defence, which was strong enough to beat Karpov (see Karpov-Miles, Skara 1980, IIRC) but not much of anyone else. Krakatoa (talk) 18:24, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I saw an edit by an anon user removing material, with the edit summary "see talk page" and there was nothing on the talk page at that time so I thought it was vandalism, sorry. Bubba73 (talk), 18:26, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I've done that sort of thing myself, no problem. To avoid such confusion, it's obviously better form for the "deleter" to post to the Talk page before making the deletion. Krakatoa (talk) 18:40, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize. Five minutes had gone by, nothing on the talk page, and this was the IP user's first edit. Almost always that means vandalism. I was wrong this time. Bubba73 (talk), 20:06, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Miles beat Karpov with 1...a6 a number of years ago in a somewhat famous game. 1...a6 can be played against practically any first move by White. Oddly enough this argues both for and against its inclusion here: for, because it is a valid reply to 1. Nc3; against, because it is not really specific to the Dunst opening. Black coud play 1...c6 or 1...g6 or 1...e6 etc. In fact any of these moves are OK regardless of White's first move; obviously there are too many variations to go through. I think it makes sense to delete 1...a6. Tpkatsa (talk) 15:38, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

another line

can we mention 1 Nc3 d5 2 e4 d4 3 Ne2 e5 4 Ng3 with Nf3 follow-up which Chessmaster 10th Edition seems to like? 220.255.1.57 (talk) 03:20, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]