Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

scandinavian "declines"


  • 16 months ago · Quote · #61

    Irontiger

    Tacticator wrote:

    so you all say 2.e5 sucks without any proof (of actual games). 

    and at U2000 level, the c6-c5 caro kann idea does not matter because 1 tempo isn't much to worry about.

    Maybe 'at the U1200 level...'. Seriously, you don't see what a tempo is worth at your level ?

    You want to know why 2.e5 sucks ? You won't find any master games in the database, but, well, take any French and put the c8 bishop out, or any Caro-Kahn and give Black one free move, you will have a good idea.

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #62

    Oran_perrett

    i think that whomever said it meant that it works well against patzers who don't know the theory but fails against decent opposition, pfren.

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #63

    srikanth_narahari

    pfren wrote:
    Oran_perrett wrote:

    i think a GM said once that the blackmar gambit is the fastest way to 2000 in both directions... i guess once you've seen the traps then it's not so scary

    I always had the impression that the fastest way to 2000 is learning to play well. Apparently I was wrong.

    That is sooooo wrong. Tongue Out

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #64

    melvinbluestone

    I suspect that, overall, declining to capture 2.exd5 will usually give white bare equality at best, which isn't saying much. I guess that's why about all you see above master level are the pawn capture. If you're an intermediate player, odds are your slight advantage with the white pieces will quickly evaporate in a few moves. But I think it's still worth a try once in while. However, 2.e5 is probably the most 'theoretically incorrect' idea, even though I had some success a while back with 2.e5 c5 3.b4!?, a wing gambit, where after 3...cxb4, white has 4.a3 or d4.

       Dubious as they are, I think 2.d4 and 2.Nf3 may be better than 2.e5. Of course, the BDG has been debated ad nauseum, but it still offers good chances for white on the intermediate level. As for 2.Nf3, after 2...dxe4 3.Ng5, the position is a transposition of the Reti Opening: 1.Nf3 d5 2.e4 dxe4 etc. Reti was some kind of a genius, but I don't know if he actually advocated the idea of 2.e4 in this line, or if it just gets catagorized as such since white begins with 1.Nf3. From what I've seen in the DBs, the more common Reti continuation is 1.Nf3 d5 2.c4. The stats for 2.e4 are not too promising.....

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #65

    GreenCastleBlock

    melvinbluestone wrote:

    As for 2.Nf3, after 2...dxe4 3.Ng5, the position is a transposition of the Reti Opening: 1.Nf3 d5 2.e4 dxe4 etc. Reti was some kind of a genius, but I don't know if he actually advocated the idea of 2.e4 in this line, or if it just gets catagorized as such since white begins with 1.Nf3. From what I've seen in the DBs, the more common Reti continuation is 1.Nf3 d5 2.c4. The stats for 2.e4 are not too promising.....

    That sequence has nothing to do with Reti's Opening.

    1.Nf3 d5 2.e4 is the Tennison Gambit, which is like the Budapest but inferior because Black has not comitted to the move ..c5.  In the Budapest, c2-c4 is a significant liability for White in the wide-open type of positions that result from taking the gambit pawn.

    ECO lookups != chess opening knowledge.

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #66

    melvinbluestone

    GreenCastleBlock wrote:
    melvinbluestone wrote:

    As for 2.Nf3, after 2...dxe4 3.Ng5, the position is a transposition of the Reti Opening: 1.Nf3 d5 2.e4 dxe4 etc. Reti was some kind of a genius, but I don't know if he actually advocated the idea of 2.e4 in this line, or if it just gets catagorized as such since white begins with 1.Nf3. From what I've seen in the DBs, the more common Reti continuation is 1.Nf3 d5 2.c4. The stats for 2.e4 are not too promising.....

    That sequence has nothing to do with Reti's Opening.

    1.Nf3 d5 2.e4 is the Tennison Gambit, which is like the Budapest but inferior because Black has not comitted to the move ..c5.  In the Budapest, c2-c4 is a significant liability for White in the wide-open type of positions that result from taking the gambit pawn.

    ECO lookups != chess opening knowledge.

    Perhaps I wasn't too clear in my comment.  I didn't say it's a Reti opening. I said the sequence 1.e4 d5 2.Nf3 dxe4 is a transposition of the Reti line 1.Nf3 d5 (ECO A06) which can continue 2.e4 dxe4 etc. See Pessi Emil-George vs Nevednichy Boris M . I guess it's a matter of chess semantics. You're right, though, the line is called the Zukertort Opening, Tennison Gambit. And yes, it is the same as the 19th century Poet Laureate of Great Britain. He changed the spelling because he didn't want the stodgy upper crust of English society to know he frittered away his time playing chess......

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #67

    melvinbluestone

    11qq11 wrote:

    c6 is a mistake  melvin.  it is played to transpose to the caro cann but you dont need to waste a move doing that when you already played d5

    I agree, in principle. After 2.e5 Bf5 3.d4, c6 seems to be needlessly cautious for black. 3...c5 looks perfectly alright, probably giving black an edge. I play one guy a lot who seems to be fixated on c6. Now that I think of it, he plays 1...c6 in reply to just about any first move by white!

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #68

    11qq11

    i used to do that in bullet.  semislav and caro kann!

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #69

    GreenCastleBlock

    melvinbluestone wrote:

    Perhaps I wasn't too clear in my comment.  I didn't say it's a Reti opening. I said the sequence 1.e4 d5 2.Nf3 dxe4 is a transposition of the Reti line 1.Nf3 d5 (ECO A06) which can continue 2.e4 dxe4 etc.

    Ok.  I just bristled at hearing 1.Nf3, or 1.Nf3 d5, referred to as the Reti Opening.  1.Nf3 d5 is not a "Reti line."  The nature of the conflict in the center has not been determined yet.  White may just play d4 and get a standard queen pawn opening.  I certainly don't think the label Reti Opening should apply to garbage like 1.Nf3 d5 2.e4.

  • 16 months ago · Quote · #70

    melvinbluestone

    Oran_perrett wrote:

    what's up with that b pawn sacrifice!?

    On and off, this line sort of interests me. Apparently, I'm in a pretty small minority, as I've posted comments about it before, and gotten zippo responses. I figured I'll try it again, since I just played a bunch of blitz games with it, some of which were pretty amusing. I lost a lot, but managed some nice wins.....  See Scandinavian Defense, Leonhardt Gambit.

  • 11 months ago · Quote · #71

    Oraoradeki

    Hi guys, sorry for bringing back old thread but I saw a new idea and I want to know if it works or not. It is 1.e4 d5 2.b3, and I was thinking it should work out in a similar way to the b3 in French: 1. e4 e6 2. b3 d5 3. Bb2 dxe4 4. Nc3



  • 11 months ago · Quote · #72

    LoveYouSoMuch

    here black has Bf5 or whatever so it should be considerably worse.

  • 11 months ago · Quote · #73

    Oran_perrett

    is the reti b3 gambit actually any good against the french? against the scandinavian is must be worse because of Bf5 (or other LSB moves)

  • 11 months ago · Quote · #74

    unterseegoat

    Just get some surstromming, scandinavians never decline that smelly $#*!


Back to Top

Post your reply: