Dear all,
Does anyone know a book that analyzes 1.e4 c5 2.Ne2 opening. Karpov played that opening and still I can't find a single source about it. Any help is appreciated
Karpov never played that, you are ill informed.
GM Soltis has written a book about it some twenty years ago, although he concentrates on the 2.Nc3/ 3.Nge2 move order.
Why would you want to play that?
It puts the knight on an inferior square with the added benefit of blocking the bishop.
You play d4 against the sicilians you want to play and some kind of closed sicilian against the ones you don't want to play. The light-squared bishop goes to g3 in the latter case. You may as well play 2.Nc3 first since the knight isn't going anywhere else.
I found this reference about 2.Ne2 that I thought to be interesting about Capablanca that appeared in a tribute to Capablanca by Reuben Fine on page 3 of The Chess Correspondent, May-June 1942:‘Capa was a perfect example of the intuitive type of master, who sees that a move is good, but cannot explain why. I recall a story told me by a strong amateur in Mexico, whom Capa once offered to teach. The gentleman was overjoyed and promptly appeared the next day for his lesson. “In the Sicilian Defense”, Capa explained, “after 1 e4 c5 the best move is 2 Ne2.” “Why?” “No importa, it does not matter; it is the best move.” And that was about all that the poor amateur could find out; it was the best move and that was all there was to it. Capa’s judgment was usually right, so this absolute certainty in himself was an invaluable asset
I'd be interested in 2 ... d5 which appears to open the game under not disadvantageous terms for black.
I'd be interested in 2 ... d5 which appears to open the game under not disadvantageous terms for black.
Nobody plays 1.c4 e5 2.d4, for a pretty good reason.
What makes you think that playing like that as Black is sound? Is white's Ne2 extra move THAT bad?
You can try justifying it by 1.e4 c5 2.Ne2 d5 3.ed5 Nf6, but still I doubt if this is the indicated way for Black.
I found this reference about 2.Ne2 that I thought to be interesting about Capablanca that appeared in a tribute to Capablanca by Reuben Fine on page 3 of The Chess Correspondent, May-June 1942:‘Capa was a perfect example of the intuitive type of master, who sees that a move is good, but cannot explain why. I recall a story told me by a strong amateur in Mexico, whom Capa once offered to teach. The gentleman was overjoyed and promptly appeared the next day for his lesson. “In the Sicilian Defense”, Capa explained, “after 1 e4 c5 the best move is 2 Ne2.” “Why?” “No importa, it does not matter; it is the best move.” And that was about all that the poor amateur could find out; it was the best move and that was all there was to it. Capa’s judgment was usually right, so this absolute certainty in himself was an invaluable asset
2 Ne2 is unrefutable. Indeed, Capa was the first to like it.
2 Ne2 became known as the Keres because of his successes in 1943-1944.
With the White pieces, Keres was a formidable basher of the Sicilian.
#open
No, I think I'd take with the queen. Thematic in Alapin's variation is Ng1-f3-e5 and ...d5 is, of course, the best move against the c3 Sicilian. I think Ne2 is just about as slow as c3 and if so, then ... d5 is justified because it achieves exactly what black desires in the closed Sicilian ... to remove white's attacking weapon, the e4 pawn. I haven't done any analysis but I suspect it is your knee-jerk reaction thats unsound, pfren, so I would expect material variations rather than what seems to be a biassed guess.
Ghost, obviously 2. Ne2 "is unrefutable" because it's a solid move, played by white. However, is it white's best move? Capa would have liked it because he was an intuitive player and it takes black out of established theory. My intuition is that 2 ... d5 is probably unrefutable too.
2...d5 is wrong. The weakening pawn moves ...c5 and ...d5 are too much.
2 Ne2 leads to either open or closed Sicilian. Perfectly normal.
Prove it with variations please, ghost. Since I suggested it, based on what seemed logical to me, I've done some research and have found that it is being played. Incidentally there are other openings where black plays similarly. My knowledge of opening variations isn't as photographic as it once was but in particular there's a variation I used to play where a similar line of play is anti-intuitive but is correct.
Anyway, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. If you think it's unsound, then prove it. I would offer to play you at 3 days a move but any victory might well just indicate a general difference in ability. But still, it might provide some indication ...
Incidentally, Ne2 is generally considered weaker than Nf3 in the closed Sicilian because it pressurises e5 insufficiently.
Prove it with variations please, ghost. Since I suggested it, based on what seemed logical to me, I've done some research and have found that it is being played. Incidentally there are other openings where black plays similarly. My knowledge of opening variations isn't as photographic as it once was but in particular there's a variation I used to play where a similar line of play is anti-intuitive but is correct.
Anyway, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. If you think it's unsound, then prove it. I would offer to play you at 3 days a move but any victory might well just indicate a general difference in ability. But still, it might provide some indication ...
Proving something with variations at move two of the game is beside the point. Ridiculous of you to ask.
Your proposed move results in nothing more than a Scandinavian with a weakening ...c5.
2 Ne2 is perfectly transpositional to either an open or a closed variation.
Then surely it's ridiculous to say that d5 is a bad move without giving variations, isn't it?
I know there's probably a gulf between our abilities but you could always give it a try and play me at 3 days a move?
P.S., since when was Ne2 a normal move in the Scandinavian? I've played it in the Caro-Kann but ....
Then surely it's ridiculous to say that d5 is a bad move without giving variations, isn't it?
If you need variations then go discuss middlegames.
Oh, you don't believe that openings have variations? You seem thick but it's probably just pent-up anger.
Although I think the d5 move is OK and given that Ne2 isn't considered quite correct in a closed Sicilian, I think a good continuation would also be e6, with the intention of not taking if white plays d4 and allowing white into a Benoni where the unhelpful Ne2 has been played. If white can go Ne2, so can black go Ne7, being prepared to play either d5 or d6. All in all, there's plenty of scope here for the resourceful player of the black pieces and I certainly wouldn't think Ne2 to be superior to Nf3. Black probably has the freer development, using this method.
As it happens, it is true. Grandmasters have written that's what they believe, giving reasons. Mainly that Ne2 pressurises e5 insufficiently and gives black an easier task to equalise. I believed them because their reasons seemed OK to me. In practice, playing against Closed Sicilians, I've also found it to be true.
Regarding 2 ...d5, you're confused, Cookiemonster, if you imagine that I was advocating playing 2 ... d5 in an attempt to win. Two people have claimed it is unsound and I was suggesting that it is not. Perhaps we should keep our respective eyes on the ball, instead of demonstrating that good chess players aren't necessarily good at applying logic in a general sense. I'm just a person who happens to be OK at chess. I'm not, primarily, a chess player who thinks that, because I'm OK at chess, I must obviously be logical and correct in everything I claim. Sometimes there's a positive correlation and sometimes there isn't and the problem with sites like this is that a normal conversation may be occurring and someone comes along with strong opinions and tries to force them on others without supporting them properly. That seems like a rather common approach here.
Dear all,
Does anyone know a book that analyzes 1.e4 c5 2.Ne2 opening. Karpov played that opening and still I can't find a single source about it. Any help is appreciated