Yes.
2.Qe2 =
New Variation of the Sicilian Defense?
Sort:
A good old saying is "long line wrong line". You can hardly expect to prove something with a single 20 moves deep line without a single deviation, expecially when W early play is all but forcing. I find rather hard to believe that W can play such a time-consuming setup and retain an advantage. B plays some bizarre moves in your line. For example why 4...Qa5? Not that it's clearly bad but certainly not the most natural idea here.
This kind of reminds me of Chigorin's attempt to refute the French with 2. Qe2, and like Lasker's response to that, 2...e5 should be comfortably equal for Black.
2...e5 indeed looks like a soul destroying response, nice idea. B should be comfortable also by choosing normal sicilian positions but this look simple and strong.
This is not so clear. World Champion Garry Kasparov has the following move order as unclear/=: 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Qe2 Be7 4.Nf3 Bh4ch 5.Kd1 Be7. So the correct response is 1.e4 c5 2.Qe2 e5 3.f4 where White has a more favorable variation of the King's gambit (How can Black avoid 3...exf4 because I am simply going to play 4.fxe5 at no cost?)
3.f4 exf4 4.Nf3 with adequate compensation for the pawn. Just consider the following move order: 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Qe2 Would you play c5 here? This transposes.
e4 c5 Qe2 Nf6 and the white queen will soon be on the run.
Because it's so much like the knight in the alekhine defense, maybe you should call it the aleqine defense
Interesting counter, but to be fair i can't see (my chess understanding is clearly limited) why allowing fxe5 is so dramatic for B.
However i would be more interested in looking at W plan against B usual sicilian setups. In the line you give B plays some bizarre moves, and has tons of early unmentioned deviations. When analyzing a relatively unexplored line it's good practice to look at several plausible early positions and do a general talk about W plan and B counters. 20 moves deep lines are frankly useless at this stage...
A more favorable version of the King's Gambit? Sure, ...c5 isn't that great, but neither is Qe2. Besides, here are two more possibilities:
Proof of equality in any of these lines is hardly a refutation because in most popular openings like the Sicilian many pros play lines that objectively are equal. Safely avoiding 20 moves of theory is the whole point. In a correspondence game with unlimited time and computer assistance then this continuation is no better or worse than many other variations commonly played at all levels. Here, for instance, White can steer for complications with:
Beware, you're falling into a classical trap: there are different kinds of equality. You can play a main line and force your opponent to find ultra-precise counters, finally landing into equality at move 20, or you can gift him an easy game at move 2.
"Safely avoiding 20 moves of theory is the whole point" But you can aviod theory in more effective ways, for example you can study up to move 10 and then continue on your own. It's not like you're lost as soon as you are out of book. As B i would be extremely pleased to see my opponent bailing out into = at best instead of putting the onus on me to equalize. I can still lose of course, it's a game of chess, but 2.Qe2 is a nice gift anyway.
Also you starteed this topic with "can anyone see a clear path to equality?" which seems a more ambitious statement.
In short, until you provide a particular plan for W which is not avaiable after more standard moves, Qe2 is not "?" but still premature and committal. You risk trasposing to standard positions where Qe2 is just bizarre. If your opponent has a decent understandng of the opening he plays, it would be indeed easy for him to get a comfortable thematic position withous even giving you the "surprise effect" advantage.
One post member suggested an early e5 as a "thematic" move giving White excellent chances for a slight plus after f4. The Queen on e2 holds the b2 pawn allowing White to meet an early Qb6 with Be3. This takes away one of the most common resources for Black because Black has to play b6 or b5 to give the Queen Bishop a decent square, but this takes away the hit on b2.
The cramping e5 gives Black problems. If Black plays dxe4 instead then dxe4 gives White the desirable pawns on c3 and e4 controlling the d4 and d5 center squares.
What does Black do about a pawn storm on the Kingside? Black's Queenside pawn play can easily be derailed and may even leave weak pawns there while Black must be alert to an eventual pawn storm on the Kingside with e5/g4/f5.
A common way to deal with the French (This is sort of a hybrid Sicilian/French opening) after e5 is f6. Here, however, Black must be aware that e6 hangs with check in some variations, or, may be a target when the e6 pawn is backwards on an open file.
With a large amount of mobility on the first and second ranks White's wing to wing mobility gives him good attacking chances.
The Queen is very useful on e2. It is not welded to the e2 square. Do you object to Bishops on g2 and e3? This is not a time/tempo attack since both sides must use pawn levers, but with both sides castling Kingside this gives White plenty of time to resposition his Queen.
To criticize my variation is the equivalent of objecting to any Closed Sicilian. I believe that White's chances here are at least as good as other variations of the Closed Sicilian. In the CS White cannot achieve anything with piece play alone; he has to advance his pawns. My pieces have good squares and my Kingside prospects are better than Black's.
You will note that the pawn structure is fluid and no pieces or pawns have been exchanged. This will lead to extremely complicated middle game positions. The toughest part of drawing an equal position is to draw.
White has greater flexibility hence better long-term prospects in the ensuing complications.
Hmmm...
You say that 2.Qe2 is a flexible move because W can still choose between different plans. True but W was even more flexible before 2.Qe2 was played. You are now more or less committed to fianchetto setups against everything, and have dropped the possibility of a quick d4. B instead in not even slightly limited by 2.Qe2 and can play every sicilian setup avaiable, plus some interesting extra options involving an early e5(noone here said that W has chances of a slight plus, neither against 2...e5 nor against the refined 2...Nc6 3...e5. The comparison with a 3.Qe2 KG works only against the first and is far form clearly favourable for W). So 2.Qe2 is indeed a very rigid move, giving B extra options while W own ideas are now limited. To prove 2.Qe2 interesting you have to show how the move is useful regardless of how B responds.
In the first post W goes for a sort of alapin setup. This looks almost unplayable to me. W has to play a very slow N maneuvre to archieve the possibility of d2-d4. With the W queen on d1 this pawn move was already avaiable...B has all the time to develop with a perfectly fine position, or break in the centee with d5. In the corresponding alapin variations W does not usually go for a fianchetto on the kingside. Qe2 is limiting his options, while B has played according to his usual plan. W has likely to play with considerable precision to mantain equality.
In addition, W has to watch out for early e5 plans after Nf3 or c3. Summing everything, B flexibility is increased when compared to normal alapin lines, W one is decreased!
A sort of closed sicilian setup looks more sensible. The queen on e2 is not disturbing W usual development, but is not helping either. The exchange of Nc3 for Qe2 means that B again has an easy d7-d5 avaiable. Again W sholud think carefully about his move order to avoid an early e7-e5 by B. And if W finally reaches his desidered setup, he is ok of course but Qe2 is certainly not giving him something special compared to usual lines. Again B has extra options thanks to 2.Qe2, while W is at best hoping to reach a normal closed sicilian position.
"To criticize my variation is the equivalent of objecting to any Closed Sicilian."Not at all. The closed sicilian is an excellent criticism to 2.Qe2(not a novelty) since you are basically saying "i can get an usual closed setup and then relocate the queen somewhere sensible"...with the closed you can archieve the setup without wasting time with the queen so either you can show some idea different from reaching the closed setup or this is just an inferior closed sicilian with B having extra options.
2.Qe2 is of course playable, but to convince people that is actually more than a random queen move you have to show concrete plans for W which are avaiable thanks to 2.Qe2.
By the way, i would start with black playing 1.e4 c5 2.Qe2 Nc6(not that there is anything wrong with e6). It looks sensible since Qe2 has already given up the possibility of Bb5, so B can make this natural developing move without fearing a pin or check, and delay any decision regarding his pawn structure.
[COMMENT DELETED]
Qe2? is a horrible move that blocks white's development.
Black should rightly continue with Nc6 or Nf6
In one of the most thoroughly analyzed variation, where is the Novelty? This seems to give a White plus against aggressive play by Black. Can anyone see a clear path to equality?