I have been playing the Parham Attack against 1...e5 about 15 times in Blitz games so far, and I have been succesful with it, winning two thirds of the time. That shouldn't be a surprise, since dubious openings are often successful in Blitz because of the surprise effect.

Today I played the Parham in a standard game for the first time. I won, and although my opponent didn't play perfectly, the game is a good example of the practical advantages of this opening.

1. e4 e5
2. Qh5 Nc6
3. Bc4 g6
4. Qf3 Nf6
5. Ne2 Bg7
6. Nbc3 0-0
7. d3 d6
8. Bg5 h6
9. Bh5 g5
10. Bg3 Nd4
11. Nxd4 exd4
12. Nd5 Nxd5
13. Bxd5 c6
14. Bb3 Qa5+
15. Kf1 Be5
16. Qh5 Kg7
17. f4 Bxf4
18. Bxf4 f5
19. Bxd6 Rf6
20. Be7 Qe5
21. Bxf6+ Qxf6
22. e5

1-0

If you're going to tell me why the parham attack is unsound, I want to hear a better reason than "it violates all of the rules of chess". The reason why this opening is playable is because once I threaten mate, black can't defend without making a concession. 3... g6 weakens the kingside, and gives white good attacking chances if black is to castle short. 3...Qe7, blocks the bishop, which forces the black queen to move a second time. I also don't want to hear that it's only equal, because I'll take an equal position that my opponent doesn't know over a .20 pawn advantage where my opponent is booked up any day of the week.