13910 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Backgammon, Yatzy, and more!
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
I have been playing white against Center Counter Game also referred to as the scandivian e4 d5 / exd and Qxd5
although I think it is a clear broken violation of the chess principle to bring out the queen to early I cannot find a way to punish it.
Some people say you loose if you try to refute it to hard.
I have just seen GM Dzindzichashvilis video about "no exception". but is this opening line an exception to the chess rules? or is this clearly a chess rule broken that can be punished?
After due preparation I would go for the formation where white has pawns on d4,c4, bishop on e2 and knights on f3.CAREFULLY watching black's e5 push BUT with a mind to swiftly attacking black's (usually) queesnside castled king.
Here is a little sample line from chessbase light 2009, so we can check out a possible line.
yes black moves queen early but you can also argue that white broke rules by moving the epawn twice in the opening while he should develop pieces while black developed the queen. I believe in white in the scandinavian but i dont think any prinsiples are broken. you can also say that the tempo white gets by forcing the queen to move is just a tempo he gets back after moving epawn twice
I daresay Deathscepter is completely wrong. Many of white's moves offered in his sample game are just awful (such as protecting the g3 pawn, as white has a near unstoppable initiative if black is to capture this poisoned pawn, and checkmate is nearly forced as in Kasparov vs. David Letterman).
The idea that the Scandinavian is "bad" is simply due to the fact that after Qxd5, black is just saying, "Here, White, develop you Knight while making me waste a tempo." This isn't horrible for black, it simply concedes an advantage to white, giving him a lead in development.
White isn't the only one who gains something, however. Black gets an aggressive Queen along with a position full of tactics. The tactical player may benefit from this opening, as he/she will play in a style appropriate to themselves, rather than be forced to play positionally.
The Scandinavian demands little time spent on learning book moves. The novice may instead be able to focus on more important chess fundamentals rather than studying the incredibly theoretical lines of the Sicilian Defense or Ruy Lopez. No need to burn the midnight oil on openings when black chooses 1.d5.
It isn't as good as more common openings. It's slightly bad, but tolerably so. It's difficult for white to punish this positional mistake.
King's Indian Attacks, Colle Systems, Stonewall Systems, Danish Gambits, Bishop's Opening, etc. Such openings are also not as good as the mainstream stuff, but appear in many novices' repertoires. Why? Because they take ten minutes to learn. At a certain level, one must upgrade one's repertoire, and the Scandinavian/Centre Counter is not the strongest, but it will do until you've got the time to learn something new. And many GMs use it, so it's certainly okay to play. There isn't a refutation, it just gives white a slightly bigger advantage.
DeathScepter : on move 5 can't white just play knight to f3 in stead of the bishop if the queen takes the pawn he has spent another move without developing and after Rg1 the queen has to move again.
I'll be sure and tell Fritz 6 that it is completely wrong in its sample line. I was just offering a little thought on the balance of this opening. I'm sure all of the players so much more qualified than I can refute the whole system. From what I have seen in my amatuer experience, black can get overwhelmed if he does not find his own strength in the position and apply it. With the queen running around, it is easy for someone at my level to get swept away by the white attack if you don't find the right countrepunches in this opening. Like any opening where you trade one dynamic feature for another, losing the thread is all too common.
That's not entirely true. It's hard for beginners to grasp what exactly black is doing bring the queen out into an obvious tempo loss. The trick is that black actually WANTS white to play Nc3. This is because the pawn on d4 (played after Qa5 or Qd6) then HAS to be protected by pieces since the knight blocks in the c-pawn, and this in turn gives black counterplay based on this positional nuance.
With all that being the case, white obtains only a slight edge in the Qa5 lines. However, in many of the Qd6 lines, white can gain a powerful attack using a kingside finachetto if black doesn't know exactly how to meet it. In this regard, the Qd6 Scandi is far more double-edged than the Qa5 system.
I'll be sure and tell Kasparov that he's less qualified than Fritz 6.
Computers are materialistic, especially earlier versions. If a world champion believes that a pawn is poisoned, I'm more inclined to trust him than a computer.
You're right that black has counterplay in the Scandinavian, but the Qe6+ variation is almost never seen for a reason.
I'm not sure why my name is being pulled into this. I don't really give a crap if some sample line I got from the chessbase 2009 demo stands the test of time. Qe6+ is not even the topic. To the original poster : The centre countre is a playable defence, but like every other chess opening, there are certain characteristics of that particular opening. The question of whether or not blacks second move is a game ending, punishable offence to chess 'law' remains to be seen. Like so much of chess, it is a trade of something for something. In our collective attempt to get better at chess, from GM's to fish like me, we constantly work on chess theory to try and find answers to what may the strongest continuations. Enjoy your chess journey of learning.
It's certainly not unplayable, but neither is it some defense you can play without a strong familiarity with the theory. In many lines, Black must play quite precisely to maintain a reasonable position. That's great if you are well-versed in the variations, but if you aren't . . . stick to what you know.
Is this Magnus Carlsen?
by david 4 minutes ago
chess.com v/s other chess sites.
by KID_Harish 4 minutes ago
2826-4000 Worst Things To Do While Playing Chess
by ChessPlayinDude47 5 minutes ago
opening with 1. a4 or 1. h4?
by bunntrabbit1 5 minutes ago
My Game Against a 124-rated player
by MGleason 8 minutes ago
7/23/2016 - Kamikaze Chess
by BryanCFB 8 minutes ago
"Game Abandonded" While still playing
by MangoHunter 13 minutes ago
Paypal payments don't work
by Alvin_Cruz 13 minutes ago
Apart from boxing, what else would combine well with chess?
by ChessPlayinDude47 21 minutes ago
Report Spam here! Spam Only! Not abuse, not cheating, Spam Only!
by Ghostliner 21 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2016 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!