I would just continue with d5 as black. If white pushes e5, i would just plauy c5. if whiye captures, i would just recapture with the c pawn and the position would be equal.
1.e4 c6 2.Ne2
Sort:
Yep, 3.Nd2 is in fact the main line theory, it's idea is to avoid the fianchetto defenses (where Black would like to exchange on f3 and push c5) - as White can play c3 in one move and also recapture on f3 with the knight, so Black is more or less forced to go into some other setup.
Panov attack is certainly quite challenging for players unprepared for the IQP positions, but - once you get a hang of it - it's not that hard to play with the Black pieces. The first time I encountered the Panov attack was at one tournament when I was playing someone rated almost 300 points above me (I was close to 1900 then, he was close to 2200) - and I drew easily, as I've quickly reached equality, exchanged some pieces and went into an equal ending. So, it is a strong option for White, but not all that terrifying.
But as FirebrandX said, the discussion was meant to be about 2.Ne2 :)
There is detailed analysis in the blog, but - I have no "hands-on" experience in that line, so I wanted mainly to get some feedback :)
my bad I was really tired last night haha
Yep, true.
This is why it should not be used as a main weapon against CK, but rather an occasional one.
The point isn't to get 'more' than in the main lines (though White can certainly get a nice attack if Black isn't careful or isn't well prepared) - but to get a (somewhat) different sort of positions.
There are two approaches to chess, I guess - one is to press really hard for an opening advantage (+=) in long sharp, deeply analysed lines (like in the Dragon or the Najdorf)... the other is just to reach a complex equal position where you are the more experienced player.
For instance, if you'd tried going over the Scotch game lines with Rybka you would've seen that it thinks Black has a slight edge most of the time.. I started playing the Scotch recently, however, and my score is 3/3 (with White). So, Rybka's opinion is not really all that important. What does "-0.2" mean anyway? The interpretation varies. A position (any position) is either:
a) an objective draw (any solid opening most probably is)
b) an objectively won or a lost position
So, what does "a slight advantage" mean? Not the initiative, since you can get a "-" eval while attacking, certainly... but rather that you have to play slightly more 'precise'. That is all. However, if you are the better player and have more experience in the particular set-up, then... that is hardly an issue, isn't it? :)
NIgel Short has occasionally played 2.Ne2
I am thinking of using this sideline (1.e4 c6 2.Ne2) as an alternative to the main lines when playing against the Caro-Kann (as an occasional surprise weapon). What are your experiences with this line?
I don't have a book covering it (though I've seen online that it has been covered in some) - so I've mostly been trying to grasp the ideas by looking at some GM games. I've summed up the analysis in a blog post here, hoping to get some feedback. So, if you're interested, go have a look (and drop a comment):
http://blog.chess.com/the_cheradenine/caro-kann-the-tricky-2ne2
I haven't used it yet OTB, but it has been a really long time since someone played the Caro-Kann against me, Scandinavian seems to be much more popular at the local club (no idea why, I always thought it was just inferior to CK) ... but I am definitely thinking of trying it out the next time I get to play against 1...c6