Attack with Queen

Many beginers start with the classic king's pawn and then rush with the queen at the opononent's side. Don't do that! It has much more disadvantages than advantages:

1) You may lose it!

2) Even if you don't lose it the oponent will chase it all over the board with knights and bishops and he has a greater developement than you do! This will most likely cost you the game.

Advantages? Well... you may get to take b or g file pawn and then go for the rook but that's unlikely to happen.

P.S.:I lost some games with this tactic but for the purpose that I look smarter I won't show them

 yes, u r right about the Nc6 but I wanted to chase the queen away-I was expecting him to take the pawn and then I move bishop for the next move: recovering my pawn and still chasing the queen. Obviusly I knew he was going for the other pawn, I moved my rook to safety and w8ed for the mistake: bishop blocking queen 8 Bh6. even if he didn't do that I still had much more developement and could move to atack. U r right about the 0-0 but I got greedy :)

Well, you're right in principle. Unfortunately, the execution needs to be accurate as well. In the given game, 2...Nc6 just makes things more complicated for black (if white plays well). Not giving up a pawn (And a center pawn, at that...), and playing 2...Nc6 would be even better.

The specifics are more important than the principles! wanting the drive the queen away is not sufficient reason to give a pawn.

In contrast with what your previous message seemed to indicate you were thinking, you have no way to force the recapture of that pawn. Not really.

That said, Nf6 may still be a good move, and black may be ok after it, but why make things complex when you've been given an easy way to play? Obviously you can't gain much from it. It is an interesting choice though, so on to the rest.

Heh... 4.Bc4 and 5.Qg5 are two successive (very) weird (read: "weak") moves to me. Black probably has enough of an advantage to seriously hope for a very large advantage even after a simple move like 5...o-o. Black's initiative will be huge. 5...Nxe4 is a BIG mistake.

In that position, there was no need to allow the kingside pawn formation to be damaged with Qxg7 like that. Especially since it did not cost white a move (Rf8 had to be played by black). Simply 7.Nf3 now would give white a small edge in my opinion.

The played 7.d3 was an error, and of course, 8.Bh6 was a blunder. Simply 8.Kf1 would have brought about an EXTREMELY complicated position in which each side has his trumps and in which black can by no means count on an advantage.

Just an unclear position.

The thing to note is that while the principles are all well and good, it's the specifics that hold the refutation/correct answers to would be principle breakers (like white in this game).

Many moves that seemingly adhere to the principles are just bad. In this game, white's loss had nothing to do with developing the queen too early, since you did not really take advantage of that.

The way to think about it is this: The principles just tell you WHAT you should be looking for. You have to find the specific way to play accordingly, or, in some positions, admit that there is no such way and the principles need to be broken.

It seems to me that (at least in this game), instead of looking at the specifics of HOW to exploit white's strange opening, and finding the right way to do it, you just pick a move that does what the principles tell you you should do at a glance, without calculating it, comparing it with other moves that do that same.

At the very least you should be checking you don't get yourself in trouble (or that you don't miss a chance to get your opponent in trouble...)

What I'm trying to say is: principles are helpful guidelines when LOOKING for a good move, not a sign that a certain move is right and another is wrong. Beware of letting them become "everything" in your game.