Antichess analysis

@CSKA_Moscou said ^

The mid news : I already play blunder openings.

In server analysis c4 is a blunder too but Tetiksh still crushes everybody...

If u actually want to learn e3, u can start with lines against Suicide Defence (Bb7), against e6 (after b4 Qg4 black either accepts queen race or declines it in Watkins) and against c5 (try Bb5 - in Watkins black plays Qc7 but also there can be other variations outside the main line). Actually I must say there's such a thing like human factor which can work even with "bad" openings. Just try to analyze specific weaknesses of each player. Though if u don't know ur opponent, u will have to rely on objective theory and also very top players barely have any weakness

Well, I'm a player first of all and not an engine enthusiast but what I understand about all this situation with analysis:

1. This change happened because previously all evaluations were the same for variants and for standard, however, in antichess white has more advantage than in standard
2. These openings which I mentioned are actually either inaccuracies or mistakes, thus, if server analysis considers them blunders, that's not correct. So what's the solution, just use local analysis cause it's better and shows real results? But as I said server analysis is "public", it's like a benchmark and if it's not gonna get updated with more advanced version, it will be confusing