I mean GMs play it against each other in rapid so it can't be that bad

This. Pretty much everyone who actually knows a lot about chess will agree with this statement. There are plenty of interesting ways to play for both sides in the Berlin.

I fail to see any reason to start banning openings. White has so many directions to go for even in the first 5 moves. There is no real advantage anywhere anyway.

History says that even the berlin wall can be brought down.

Go ask Zviad Izoria, and some other GMs their thoughts about it. A lot of them find it boring as well as us plebs. As someone who plays the Ruy Lopez, I find the Berlin more zzzz than the London. Which people seem to complain about more. Almost every single Berlin player I run into just want to trade off their queens and resolve everything else into an endgame. If your argument is that endgames are interesting I'd agree, but that's not a defense of the Berlin. The open Ruy and Chigorin are actually interesting, not the Berlin.

Though I agree no openings should be banned.

Don't tell me what to do.

The argument is that unbalanced endings are interesting. Maybe at the top of the world Berlin is less interesting than at the top amateur level (up to say 2500 FIDE). I don't understand the last part of sentence.

Again a bit of a strange argument. Perhaps some openings are more interesting than others, I'm not saying that. I am saying that the opening in question allows both players lots of different ways for interesting play. Yes it's drawish, because chess is drawish.

1) You said something completely false. There are quite a few people who know a lot about chess don't like that particular opening. If you don't actually ask these people their opinions about openings don't speak for them.

2) Chess isn't drawish except at like the top .0001%. One reason Alireza Firouzja got so high in elo is he farmed 2600s or so.

What completely false did I say though? I agreed with the statement "The Berlin Defense is quite a rich and complicated opening. It's boring reputation is rather undeserved". I said "Pretty much everyone who actually knows a lot about chess will agree with this statement". Pretty much everyone, but not everyone. I am not claiming that it's the most entertaining opening out there. I am not claiming that it's everyone's favorite opening or that it's more interesting than Chigorin or Open Ruy.

Many people don't like that particular opening because it's a tough nut to crack. I'd also prefer someone playing weaker openings against me, like Chigorin Ruy (which I've played a ton in my life as black, too).

Again, a totally random statement. Firouzja got where he is by being a lot better than the 2600-guys. That has nothing to do with chess not being drawish.

You said this in response to someone saying the Berlin was rich. When there are GMs who will say it isn't. Zviad Izoria (GM) pans the opening for being boring. IM Marc Esserman also pans it for the same reason. Do you know better than them? They stream and I have heard other GMs utter the same thing over streams. A lot of GMs play it for quick draws like Hikaru was doijng in the candidates, not because it's rich.



If chess was drawish Alireza wouldn't have gotten better than 2600s. There would be a cap. Chess is only drawish at the very top where skill differences aren't that big, and even then it's not really true considering what Nepo did at the candidates. Humans aren't Leela, AlphaZero, or Stockfish. Hence why you still get decisive games even in the WCC. You can go through databases for top players in the past thirty years and there might be some tendencies towards draws, there's also more Ws in favor of one player over another. You can do it with Nepo and Carlsen. You can do it with Anand and Kramnick and so forth. And if you look at the overwhelming majority of players below lets say 2000 FIDE rating, you are gonna see way more decisive games than draws. Quit trying to infer what engines say onto chess when it's still humans playing it.

I quoted the exact sentence to which I replied and my exact reply to it. It can't get any more clear than that.

Did you consider the possibility that I do? I am a very strong amateur, if that wasn't obvious already. Not sure why that matters though. Consider the possibility that they don't like the opening, because it's good and they don't know what to do against it.

Since you like to name drop and quote the top players, I am sure you are interested to hear that Aronian once said he plays the Berlin when he feels inspired and just wants a game.

You seem to purposefully misunderstand what "chess is drawish" means. I have no more time for this nonsense, but all the best for you!

Chess isn't inherently drawish. Chess tournament structures are drawish.

Look at the FIDE World Cup. That format *requires* decisive results, and the sooner you get your decisive results, the more rest you get before the next round.