Answers.Body: <p>Pretty much any opening that is no longer played was "refuted" by an engine. You can check for example the 9. 0-0-0 Nxd4 line in the Sicilian Dragon. </p>
  
  <p>Computer analysis has also found interesting ways for White to keep the advantage in the From's gambit, although this opening was never that popular (because of 1.f4 being a rarity)</p>
  
  <p>About 25 years ago, Kasparov reintroduced the Evans gambit into elite chess. Despite initial success computer-assisted analysis forced it to step away again.</p>
  
  <p>The list goes on and on, but sometimes it's just about a variation in a particular line being changed by another, rather than something like the Sicilian or the French being abandonned altogether</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-07-08T08:56:01.277Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2019-07-08T08:56:01.277Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: David
Body: <p>I'm curious about the history of chess openings. Nowadays there is a lot of theory about what opening moves are considered mainstream and (near) optimal, such that either side can keep up with their opponent and maintain equality (or an advantage if anyone errs). </p>
  
  <p>This sometimes goes for up to 25-30 moves without either player thinking much at all, simply because they know the best moves and have studies it extensively, and undoubtedly validated it with chess engines.</p>
  
  <p>Now I'm wondering about before engines were a thing. Are there any known examples of openings, previously considered to be strong or played regularly by <em>strong players</em>, but later -- with the help of engines --  determined to be dubious/easily counterable?</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-06-28T13:19:45.863Z
Comments.Text: Depending on how far back you're willing to go, the romantic era of the 1800's featured many examples of gambits which are nowadays considered dubious or worse.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Scounged
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-06-28T13:29:29.800Z
Comments.Text: I would say as far as we can go back, where the sport was still well known in the world, and preferably when grandmasters (or well known historic chess players) were around.
Comments.UserDisplayName: WiseDev
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-06-28T18:12:46.680Z
Comments.Text: Strongly related: [Have engines refuted any established openings?](https://chess.stackexchange.com/q/23480/7297)
Comments.UserDisplayName: Glorfindel
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-06-28T18:54:01.867Z
Comments.Text: Well then, the first example that comes to mind is of course the first official world champion Wilhelm Steinitz, who had some rather "interesting" ideas in the opening. Look through his world championship matches and you will find some really objectionable opening choices. In general though, the converse of the scenario you're asking about has been happening all the time; openings which were previously thought to be bad for one side have been revived with the help of computers.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Scounged
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-07-01T10:39:36.230Z
Comments.Text: Maybe 9...Nxd4 is the Sicilian Dragon
Comments.UserDisplayName: David
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2022-01-21T12:37:15.760Z
Comments.Text: Bobby Fischer Compares Chess960 to Puffed Wheat / Puffed Weed. Hikaru Nakamura reacts. does hikaru mention something like that in this video? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5my99K-eSI
Comments.UserDisplayName: BCLC
Tags: <opening><history>
Title: Are there any known examples of spurious strong chess openings, which have been determined to be dubious with the introduction of the first engines?
ThreadText: # Are there any known examples of spurious strong chess openings, which have been determined to be dubious with the introduction of the first engines?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2019-06-28)
  
  I'm curious about the history of chess openings. Nowadays there is a lot of theory about what opening moves are considered mainstream and (near) optimal, such that either side can keep up with their opponent and maintain equality (or an advantage if anyone errs).
  
  This sometimes goes for up to 25-30 moves without either player thinking much at all, simply because they know the best moves and have studies it extensively, and undoubtedly validated it with chess engines.
  
  Now I'm wondering about before engines were a thing. Are there any known examples of openings, previously considered to be strong or played regularly by *strong players*, but later -- with the help of engines -- determined to be dubious/easily counterable?
  
  **Tags:** opening, history
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: Depending on how far back you're willing to go, the romantic era of the 1800's featured many examples of gambits which are nowadays considered dubious or worse.  
  > **username_0**: I would say as far as we can go back, where the sport was still well known in the world, and preferably when grandmasters (or well known historic chess players) were around.  
  > **username_2**: Strongly related: [Have engines refuted any established openings?](https://chess.stackexchange.com/q/23480/7297)  
  > **username_1**: Well then, the first example that comes to mind is of course the first official world champion Wilhelm Steinitz, who had some rather "interesting" ideas in the opening. Look through his world championship matches and you will find some really objectionable opening choices. In general though, the converse of the scenario you're asking about has been happening all the time; openings which were previously thought to be bad for one side have been revived with the help of computers.  
  > **username_3**: Maybe 9...Nxd4 is the Sicilian Dragon  
  > **username_4**: Bobby Fischer Compares Chess960 to Puffed Wheat / Puffed Weed. Hikaru Nakamura reacts. does hikaru mention something like that in this video? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5my99K-eSI  
  
  ---
  
  ## 1 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_3 on 2019-07-08. Score: 4 | Accepted answer
  
  Pretty much any opening that is no longer played was "refuted" by an engine. You can check for example the 9. 0-0-0 Nxd4 line in the Sicilian Dragon.
  
  Computer analysis has also found interesting ways for White to keep the advantage in the From's gambit, although this opening was never that popular (because of 1.f4 being a rarity)
  
  About 25 years ago, Kasparov reintroduced the Evans gambit into elite chess. Despite initial success computer-assisted analysis forced it to step away again.
  
  The list goes on and on, but sometimes it's just about a variation in a particular line being changed by another, rather than something like the Sicilian or the French being abandonned altogether
  
  
  ---
  
  