1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Qc7

  • #1

    Opinions??

  • #2

    I'm no chess expert by any means...but it seems like a reasonable opening to me, perhaps a sicilian hybrid? 

  • #3

    Can Pfren comment on this?

  • #4

    doesn't white just play 3.c3 and play d4 next move?

  • #5

    1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Qc7 3.c3 Nf6 =

  • #6

    Roeczak wrote:

    1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Qc7 3.c3 Nf6 =

    after 3..nf6 4.e5 Nd5 5.d4, where the Qc7 move doesn't appear to be obviously useful. tbh, i think white is a bit better, the Qc7 move compared to the normal nc6 (mainline alapin), seems to be not as effective.

    It's not even this setup that seems a bit suspicious, I am sure that white has some closed sicilian setups in which the Qc7 move is not so useful in. 

  • #7

    I guess somebody should mention the name of this line: It's called the Quinteros Variation, after the Argentine GM. It's an interesting idea for black, but as I don't play the Sicilian, I've never tried it. I don't think it's considered out-n-out bad, just not very popular. After 3.Nc3 e6 4.d4, black already has problems. And if 3...Nc6 4.Bb5 followed by O-O, and again I think white has the initiative.

  • #8

    @jempty_method:  I stand corrected! I mixed up my transpositions. At least I was right about the name. After 4...cxd4, white can also try 5.Nb5, but I think that, theoretically, although white gets a lot of pressure, black is supposed to be able to equalize. I found this game from 2005 (with 2nd & 3rd moves transposed), between two 2600+ players. Black hangs on doggedly in the face of a pretty violent attack. Like I said, 2...Qc7 is an interesting idea, but I think most players prefer not to place the queen so early, showing their hand, so to speak. Also, as mentioned before, against anti-sicilian lines, like 2.c3, the queen's position may be problematic.

  • #9

    The only "problem" I see for Black after 3.Nc3 e6 4.d4 is picking between a pretty regular Taimanov, and a pretty regular Can.

    Roeczak wrote:

    1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Qc7 3.c3 Nf6 =

    Sign your draw as soon as possible then- your opponent may recover from the brainfart.

  • #10

    I agree completely, pfren! This seems like another gambit idea for experienced Black players. If white tries to "punish" Black, it backfires. Otherwise, Black can probably gain a few minutes on the clock with his unusual move order.

    The best way to really take advantage of the move order may be to aim for a Maroczy bind set up or simply play 3.c3. The problem with 3.c3 is that Black gets a playable game with 3...d6 4.d4 Nf6 5.Bd3 g6, as Polgar played against Smyslov. She won that game.

    The Black Q often goes to c7 in the Sicilian. It may not be optimally placed there in Maroczy lines as in the game below.

    Here, the game resembles a sort of King's Indian where the Black Q definitely was misplaced.

  • #11
    pfren wrote:

    The only "problem" I see for Black after 3.Nc3 e6 4.d4 is picking between a pretty regular Taimanov, and a pretty regular Can.

    Roeczak wrote:

    1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Qc7 3.c3 Nf6 =

    Sign your draw as soon as possible then- your opponent may recover from the brainfart.

    Is this an endorsement of 2...Qc7, or of criticism of 3.Nc3 and 3.c3? Undecided

  • #12
    melvinbluestone wrote:

    Is this an endorsement of 2...Qc7, or of criticism of 3.Nc3 and 3.c3?

    Neither.

    3.c3 is objectively best, but even strong players would avoid it if not quite familiar with Alapin sicilians as white.

  • #13

    I am sure that Vadim Svjaginsev, a very strong player and lover of the bizarre, had his tongue firmly in cheek when he invented 2.Na3 against the Sicilian.

  • #14

    Yeah, Jempty, you could reach the game position via the same move order. It probably most closely resembles a Semi-Benoni structure where Black has wasted a move with Qc7.

    I don't know why Pfren consideres 3.c3 to be objectively better than 3.c4. They both give white a very comfortable advantage. I personally prefer 3.c4 because I think it's easier to show that Blacks' Q is misplaced in those lines. But I'm not claiming an objective advantage for 3.c4 over 3.c3.

     Subjectively, I expect Black is more ready to face 3.c3 Alapin ideas than 3.c4 Maroczy Bind plans.

  • #15
    pfren wrote:

    I am sure that Vadim Svjaginsev, a very strong player and lover of the bizarre, had his tongue firmly in cheek when he invented 2.Na3 against the Sicilian.

    Did you mean Zvjaginsev? He's beaten both Khalifman and Ponomariov with 2.Na3! WOW!

  • #16

    Yes, him... recreating Cyrillic into english is a royal pain for me.

  • #17

    Normally Qc7 is played later in the game. 

    For example the Taimanov variation

    1. e4 - c5 2. Nf3 - e6 3. d4 - cxd4 4. Nxd4 - Nc6 5. Nc3 - a6 6. Be2 - Qc7  

  • #18

    BTW, I am not even supporting 2...Qc7, I am an alapin player myself and i ve never played anything else than the alapin against the sicilian

    I played 1.e4 c5 2.c3 Qc7 3.Nf3? (d4 +=) Nf6 and it lead to an equal position (pfren, what do you think of 1.e4 c5 2.c3 Qc7?)

  • #19
    SmyslovFan wrote:

     Subjectively, I expect Black is more ready to face 3.c3 Alapin ideas than 3.c4 Maroczy Bind plans.

    It seems you haven't realized that 3.c4 e6 4.d4 cd4 5.Nxd4 a6 is an old Kan line which isn't giving black any trouble. So, white usually delays d2-d4 with 4.Nc3 etc, but still if Black plays ...b6, ...Bb7 and ...d6 we have a pretty standard hedgehog.

    I find the way Black handled the opening in this game very instructive:



  • #20

    I am sure 1.e4 c5 2.c3 Qc7 is better for white

Top
or Join

Online Now