Enter Your Reply

Glenn, it is true that the amount of opening lines is very central to the
long-term vitality of a variant (i.e. if it can survive theorization). If
we go back to Kramnik - Kasparov World Chess Championship 2000. How
inspiring was this to the vast majority of amateurs? In the eyes of the
experts it was probably a good and interesting match. But can amateurs
really appreciate the Berlin defence with queen exchange, where the result
is a draw in game after game? Of course, the promotive effect would have
been greater had they played King's gambit, or the Evan's gambit in the
Giuoco Piano. But such openings are obsolete among the elite. 

Had the possible opening lines been vastly greater, then white needn't
try to prize open that stubborn defence in game after game. But Kasparov
is forced to play 3.Bb5 because 3.Bc4 is a draw. It is as simple as that!
King's gambit is a draw, too, or possibly worse. Do you see my point? The
grandmasters are facing a problem in the openings which risks making the
game tedious. They have to rely on 'Fritz analyses to the 45th move' in
that particular critical variant. Soon we must rename the World
Championship to 'The World Championship in Opening Preparation With The
Aid of Computers and Seconds.' I'll have a look at Tiger Chess. 
/Mats