Talk:Chess Opening Theory/1. a4/1...e5/2. h4

I would be in favor of deleting this page entirely. This can hardly even be considered an opening. There is no strategy involved and no benefits. Is there even any historical support for calling this the "crab" opening? Some novice wikipedian is having a laugh by putting this entry in. Tomson (talk) 00:17, 30 April 2008 (UTC)


 * With all due respect, Tomson, I thoroughly disagree. Despite the opening's lack of practicality, it deserves to be documented regardless. To take down the page would be to take down real (albeit useless) chess knowledge. The restriction of knowledge is virtually never for the best, even when it involves the Crab. Furthermore, the name "Crab" is entirely possible, if not plausible for a chess opening such as this. You must take into account such openings such as the Cow and Monkey's Bum and realize people have been giving chess openings foolish names for many a year. For these reasons, I must defend the legitimacy of the Crab. 🦀🦀🦀💪💪 DuckLordReal (discuss • contribs) 20:45, 7 July 2023 (UTC)