The Fried Liver (Giulio Cesare Polerio vs Domenico, 1610)

A variation of the Two Knights Defence including a Knight sacrifice on f7 first appeared in a game between two Italian Masters in the 17th century. Since the sacrifice leads to a position where the Black king has to endure an attack in the center, the variation later became known as The Fegatello or Fried Liver Attack.

The exact etymology is not known. In The Oxford Companion To Chess, David Hooper and Kenneth Whyld speculated that the name implies that the sacrifice of White’s knight is like a slice of liver used as bait in a trap 1 (in the Italian language, the word Fegatello is an idiom meaning “dead as a piece of liver”).

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Bc4 Nf6
4. Ng5 d5
5. ed5 Nd5
6. Nf7 Kf7
7. Qf3

The Monkey's Bum (Nigel Povah vs Shimon Kagan, 1977)

In the 1970s, there was a certain wave of popularity for the Modern Defence. Grandmasters such as Raymond Keene and Jonathan Speelman (and later Yasser Seirawan) used to play it on a regular basis. 2

In the search for refutation, British International Master Nigel Povah started investigating a rapid assault on the f7 square. He devised a weird variation involving a sacrifice of the d4 pawn in return for the rapid development.

When he showed the variation to his friend Ken Coates, the latter declared: “If that works then I’m a monkey’s bum!” The name stuck ever since.

1. e4 g6
2. Bc4 Bg7
3. Qf3 e6
4. d4 Bd4
5. Ne2 Bg7
6. Nbc3

Povah was defeated by black in this 1977 game, but the opening has allowed the much more popular and respected Monkey's Bum Deferred to evolve against the Modern Defense.

The Toilet Variation (Jasim vs Faisal 2002)

Legend has it that this opening was conceived in the 1970's by a Sicilian Grand Prix player in the restroom: hence its crappy name. It doesn't help matters that the Toilet Variation quickly flushes away any advantage White could hope for out of the opening.

1. e4 c5
2. f4 d5

If black doesn't push d5, white may just play it like a Labourdonnais variation of the french defense.

Otherwise...

3. Nc3 d4
4. Nb1 Nc6
5. Bc4
white is ok if he has time to play g3 bg2 nf3 etc. The only problem is an early e5 where after nf3 exf4 is annoying.

5. ... e5
6. d3

White is playing for equity at best here, but it is a very unusual game. Some people are into that sort of thing.

Full game of Jasim vs Faisal

1.e4 c5
2.f4 d5
3.Nc3 dxe4
4.Nxe4 Nd7
5.Nf3 Ngf6
6.Nf2 Qc7
7.g3 b6
8.Bg2 Bb7
9.O-O e6
10.Qe2 Be7
11.b3 O-O
12.Bb2 Rfe8
13.c4 Rad8
14.Nd3 Qb8
15.Nde5 Qa8
16.Nxf7 Kxf7
17.Ng5+ Kg6
18.Qd3+ Kh6
19.g4 Nxg4
20.Qxh7
1-0

The Hillbilly Attack (Carlsen vs Tomashevsky, 2015)

This "rootin'-tootin'" response to the Caro-Kann allegedly impressed a young Magnus Carlsen when he first saw it.

If it's good enough for Magnus, it's good enough for me.

1. e4 c6
2. Bc4

With no established theory on this opening which is equal for both sides at the start of the game, it favours the better player who is looking to put their Caro Karn opponent off their game.

The Hippopotamus Defense (Nezhmetdinov vs Ujtelky, 1964)

1. e4 c6
2. d4 d5
3. Nc3 dxe4
4. Nxe4 Bf5
5. Ng3 Bg6
6. h4 h6

The opening behaves a bit like a hippo -- lying in wait below the waterline -- after Black moves most of his pawns to his third rank and most of his pieces to the second. The idea for Black is to set up a flexible defense that can adapt to whatever White tries.

More of a formation than a defense this was played by Ujtelky at the Chigorin Memorial in Sochi in 1964, defeating Nezhmetdinov in 75 moves. Ujtlelky also deployed this against Spassky (without success) at the same tournament.

Inspired by this, Spassky deployed it twice in his 1966 world championship match against Tigran Petrosian, gaining 2 draws as black.

The Orangutan (Tartakower vs Marcozy, 1924)

1. b4.

Also known as "The Polish" or "The Sokolsky" This dubious-looking initial move for White takes its name from a famous 1924 game between Tartakower and Maróczy in New York. While visiting the Bronx Zoo before the game, Tartakower claimed he "talked" with an orangutan named Susan, who recommended the Polish grandmaster open his game with 1. b4.

The game was drawn, but the name lives on in history.

A monograph on this opening was written by Alexei Sokolsky in 1963.

The Fried Fox (Williams vs Simons, 1999)

1. f3 ??
2. Kf2

Don't try this at home, unless you want to enrage your opponent. The opening of f3 is renowned to be of the worst opening 20 plays available in chess, and to follow it up with Kf2 is nothing short of antagonistic.

Story goes Simon Williams was mid-table going into the last round of the 1999 British Chess Championship, and was wagered by his friends a crazy amount of alcohol to win with this opening.

Was recently used in 2020 by Carlsen to defeat So in a blitz tournement at GM level, so if nothing else it has an amount of psychological impact.

Can also be used as black, but... Why?

1. ?? f6
2. ?? Kf7

The Sodium Attack (Durkin vs McCormick, 1948)

1. Na3

Na is the chemical symbol for Sodium - so the Na3 opening is hence call ed the Sodium Attack. First notably played by Robert Durkin.

A reactive play that cedes white's momentum, the Sodium attack has been used several times recently by Carlsen and Veselin. In fact, Veselin played it against Carlsen in 2009 which led to a draw.

The Drunken Knight Opening

1 Nh3

If 1 Na3 is The Sodium Attack, it would be reasonable to expect that the mirror move – 1 Nh3 – is, correspondingly, The Ammonium Attack.

Alas, nothing in chess is expected. For some reason it is known as the Drunken Knight Opening.

Also called the Amar opening by Tartakower after Parisian amateur Charles Amar in the 1930s, this opening is as questionable as the Sodium as it does nothing to promote white's board position in any major way. It has been joked by chess author Tim Harding that "Amar" is an acronym for "Absolutely mad and ridiculous".

Carlen, being Carlsen, defeated GM Dreev in 2018 with this opening in Rapid.

The Halloween Gambit

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Nc3 Nf6
4. Nxe5

Also known as the Müller-Schulze gambit, or the Leipzig gambit is an aggressive variant of the Four Knights Game, where an early knight is traded by white for a pawn. It's a large sacrifice, but the white player gains tempo and development.

Whilst this seems poor, if the black player accepts the gambit he exposes a black knight that is chased by white, who aims for a quick victory.

The computer program Brause, has numerous wins playing this opening in the Blitz format due to the threats it can present, often in less than 15 moves. WGM Eva Repkova scores 2 out of 3 with the Halloween Attack as a blitz gambit proving it can be a very dangerous weapon with enormous tactical potential.

The consensus is that if black can stabilise they can use the lead to take victory, often quoting Pinski's reply.

4...Nxe5
5.d4 Nc6
6.d5 Bb4!
7.dxc6 Nxe4
8.Qd4 Qe7

The Frankenstein-Dracula

1. e4 e5
2. Nc3 Nf6
3. Bc4 Ne4

This sharp variation of the Vienna Game is not for the faint of heart.

Though it's not the greatest opening, it is playable at high levels of chess, and was used by Alexei Shirov in exhibition games.

The chess author Tim Harding considered this opening so violent that "a game between Dracula and the Frankenstein monster would not seem out of place."

The Flick-Knife Attack

By 1956, the Modern Benoni was established as black's most dynamic response to 1.d4, due to it's adoption by the Soviet players, chief among them Mikhail Tal.

1.d4 Nf6
2.c4 c5
3.d5 e6
4.Nc3 exd5
5.cxd5 d6
6.e4 g6
7.Nf3

Traditional (favours black)
7...Bg7
8.Be2 0-0
9.0-0

Modern (favours white)
7...Bg7
8.h3 0-0
9.Bd3

Modern avoided (favours black)
7...a6

Until the Taimanov Attack (invented by Mark Taimanov, later known as the Flick-Knife attack), the traditional play was 7.Nf3 Bg7 8.Be2 0-0 9.0-0, until in 1973 Ljubojevic demonstrated 9...a6 10.a4 Bg4 11.Bf4 Bxf3 12.Bxf3 Qe7, deterring white players from continuing this gambit until the late 80's where a modern line pursued as 8.h3 0-0 9.Bd3. If black continues in the same manner as the traditional line of 9...a6 10.a4 Nbd7 11.0-0 Re8, then white appears to regain the advantage with 12.Bf4.

Black adjusted with 9...b5 10.Nxb5 Nxe4 11.Bxe4 Re8 and maintain the prevailing thought until 12.Ng5 was discovered in 1990 by white. The 10...Re8 is a better way of recovering the pawn setting up a complicated game.

The other capture of 10.Bxb5, let to a conclusion that 10...Nxe4 11.Nxe4 Qa5+ 12.Nfd2 Qxb5 13.Nxd6 Qa6 14.N2c4 Nd7 15.0-0 was the only way that black could maintain equality and push for a draw. With such a large amount of theory being required knowledge to even salvage a draw, black looked for other ways of combating this modern line of play.

If black plays 7...a6 threatening 8...b5, white responds with 8.a4, allowing black a transposition of 8...Bg4 back to the traditional Ljubojevic main line of 9.Be2 Bxf3 10.Bxf3 Bg7 11.0-0 0-0 12.Bf4 Qe7.
White cannot avoid this with 9.Qb3, as 9...Bxf3 10.Qxb7 allows black to either maintain material and positional equality with 10...Bxg2 or try for more with 10...Nbd7. It also cannot escape black’s idea with 8.h3 as this allows 8...b5,necessitating 9.Bd3 Bg7 10.0-0 0-0.

Taimanov's analysis in 1956 wasn't fully realised until the 1980's when the variant of 7.f4 Bg7 that allowed white to transpose to the main line of the Four Pawns Attack in the King's Indian Defense with 8.Nf3 0-0 9.Be2 was modified to 8.Bb5+ Nfd7, with Kasparov showing that 9.a4 was more dangerous for black.

It is here the Taimanov Attack was christened The Flick-Knife attack. Huge respect for any FUMBBL player that is still actually ready the bio of a [L] goblin with historical discussion of the intricacies of high level closed game chess.

As an epilogue, I will mention that over 20 years later in the 21st century this opening is still quite reasonable as Watson showed that a disruptive check on 9...Qh4+ was playable. This is not the only option for black as Gashimov showed us that 9...0-0 10.Nf3 Na6 11.0-0 Nb4 still has much game to be played.

Taimanov Attack (The Flick-Knife Attack)
1.d4 Nf6
2.c4 c5
3.d5 e6
4.Nc3 exd5
5.cxd5 d6
6.e4 g6
7.f4 Bg7
8.Bb5+ Nfd7
9.a4

The Nescafe Frappe Attack (Burgess vs Tebb, 1988)

1. d4 Nf6
2. c4 c5
3. d5 b5
4. cb5 a6
5. Nc3 ab5
6. e4 b4
7. Nb5 d6
8. Bc4

First of all, we need to know what a "Coffee House" player is. According to Wikipedia:
- An adjective used to describe a move, player, or style of play characterized by risky, positionally dubious play that sets traps for the opponent. The name comes from the notion that one would expect to see such play in skittles, games played in a coffeehouse or similar setting, particularly in games played for stakes or blitz chess.

So in 1987, there was a certain game between Collins and Tebb, won by Black after a speculative sacrifice. Informally, the winner was nicknamed as the "King of Coffee House".

The next year, Burgess faced Tebb with the White pieces and ‘decaffeinated’ the King of Coffee House with the help of the afore-mentioned Gambit.

This win inspired him so much, that he went on to write a whole book about the system.In the book, he also has to say something about the name of the opening:
- This line as yet has no official name (except ‘Zaitsev line with 8 Bc4’); it is generally referred to as simply ‘The Hack Line’, or for reasons which are rather obscure, the The Nescafé Frappé Attack or NFA for short.

The Apocalypse Attack

1. e4 c6
2. Nf3 d5
3. ed5 cd5
4. Ne5

If the apocalypse is a scenario where one man fights for survival against his own, a chess equivalent would be a single piece trying to take down the entire opposing army.

In a certain variation of the Caro-Kann Exchange Variation, it is precisely what White tries to achieve by having a lone knight dominate the board.

Even though moving the knight for the second time violates the basic opening principle, this opening is actually quite playable.