X_PLAYER_J_X

Nov 21, 2015

0

#21

NuancedConfers wrote:

1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 g6 3 Nc3 d5 is a Grunfeld.

1 d4 Nf6 2 Nc3 is not.

End of discussion.

LOL @ You and N0S0UP4Y0U

End of Discussion you say?

The Gruenfeld is only a Gruenfeld if the following moves are played 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 ?

Queen Pawn Game/Veresov Attack/Two Knights System/Gruenfeld Defense

1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bg5 Nbd7 4.Nf3 g6

Gruenfeld Defense/Counterthrust Variation

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.g3 Bg7 4.Bg2 d5

HHMMMMMMM Really?

X_PLAYER_J_X

Nov 21, 2015

0

#22

N0S0UP4Y0U wrote:

You're clueless about openings. You probably also don't know how to mate with a rook and king versus a king -- if not look at one of my bullet games for an example.

You have nothing that you can say to me.

You have lost all your credibility after your post #6

N0S0UP4Y0U wrote:

AnishSomani wrote:

Thanks for posting the line, as it illustrates a key line.

However I am trying to avoid playing 2 d5 as in the line and as it closes the game. I would like an opening which helps my playstyle (opening up the game ,sorta like a Gruenfield).

But you have to play according to the position. With 2.Nc3 White intends 3.e4. 2...d5 stops it, and then as I say, on 3.Bg5, you can open the position with 3...c5. There isn't just one way to get an open position. If White doesn't give you the proper target (his pawn on c4 in the Gruenfeld), you're going to have figure out another way.

In the beginning stages of the game black seeks to target the e4 square.

After black uses his resources to target that square and comes up short/fails black than switches his focus.

Thus, The pawn which the focus gets switched to in the Gruenfeld is the d4 pawn.

Black only targets the "c4" square after white has compromised his ability to protect c4.

X_PLAYER_J_X

Nov 21, 2015

0

#23

Analysis of the beginning moves of the Gruenfeld go as the following:

White plays 1.d4 with the idea of claiming/occupying the center with a pawn.

Black responses in a hyper-modern way.

Instead of directly trying to occupy the center with a pawn black plays the move 1...Nf6 which indirectly attacks the center with a piece from a distance (I.E The knight)

White would love to play 2.e4 having 2 pawns in the center.

However, blacks knight move has prevented it.

Thus, White plays the move 2.c4 with the idea getting a 2 pawn duo with 1 center pawn + 1 side pawn.

The c4 also helps fight for control of the d5 square which is what the black knight is currently hitting.

Black plays 2...g6 with the idea of continuing in hyper-modern fashion.

Trying to attack the center from a distance.

White plays 3.Nc3 WHY?

The move 3.Nc3 add's another attacker to both d5 and e4

The squares which both sides are fighting for are the d5 and e4 squares.

White control of those squares:

The current count on the d5 square =

White has 2 attackers on d5 (c4 + Nc3)

The current count on e4 square =

White has 1 attackers on (e4)

Blacks control of the squares:

The current count on the d5 square =

Black has 1 attacker on d5 (Nf6)

The current count on e4 square =

Black has 1 attackers on e4 (Nf6)

Black is losing the fight for control of the d5 and e4 squares.

White is threatening to play e4 next move.

Thus, At move 3 black plays d5.

The move d5 by black uncovers more attackers of the d5 and e4 squares.

Now the Black queen + the d5 pawn help add more control of the d5 and e4 squares.

White control of those squares:

The current count on the d5 square =

White has 2 attackers on d5 (c4 + Nc3)

The current count on e4 square =

White has 1 attackers on (e4)

Blacks control of the squares:

The current count on the d5 square =

Black has 2 attacker on d5 (Nf6 + Qd8)

The current count on e4 square =

Black has 2 attackers on e4 (Nf6 + d5)

One popular line is the Exchange Variation.

White's idea is to get rid of the defender of e4.

The move cxd5 removes a defender of the e4 square.

The defender which is removed is the black pawn which was on d5.

At which point to save material equality black has to play Nxd5.

Now in the above position after black played Nxd5.

White has managed to take over the e4 square.

Black has no pieces or pawns hitting e4 in the above position.

Thus, White can play the move e4 with tempo on the knight.

Which than leaves black with a dilemma.

What is blacks dilemma?

Well the dilemma black has is black goes back to f6 trying to regain his control of e4.

White could if he wanted to answer with the move f3.

At which point the e4 square will never have a problem again.

If black moves his knight to instead b6 trying to admit his defeat of e4.

He is left facing 2 center white pawns with a knight on a very awkward square.

White can play f3 any way and still have a wonderful position.

Which is why at this point black decides the fight for e4 has ended in a fail.

Black comes to grips with the fact his knight retreats are not as great.

Thus, Black decides to go for a structural change which sets in motion a plan of switch his focus.

Blacks new focus becomes the "other center pawn" which is the d4 pawn.

Since the e4 pawn has been fully protected.

ThrillerFan

Nov 21, 2015

0

#24

N0S0UP4Y0U wrote:

X_PLAYER_J_X wrote:

N0S0UP4Y0U wrote:

X_PLAYER_J_X wrote:

Actually in the Gruenfeld you play the move d5 eventually.

I play the Gruenfeld as well and believe it or not you can play a Gruenfeld against this line.

The Vereso Attack is not considered very good.

If you like the Gruenfeld play the below diagram line against it.

The above line is the Gruenfeld.

Queen Pawn Game/Veresov Attack/Two Knights System/Gruenfeld Defense

ECO D01

Are you aware of the fact that two COMPLETELY FRIGGIN DIFFERENT opening systems can be named after the same player, in this case Gruenfeld

Are you aware of the fact that two COMPLETELY DIFFERENT VARIATIONS of the same opening can be labeled under the same defense?

I challenge you to prove how this is not a Gruenfeld.

The position in fact is an nicer/better verison of the Gruenfeld because white didn't play c4.

The line can be compared to the Gruenfeld Defense/Three Knights Variation/Petrosian System

You're clueless about openings. You probably also don't know how to mate with a rook and king versus a king -- if not look at one of my bullet games for an example.

As much of an imbecile that NoSoupForYou is for saying that a 2100 player like me doesn't know jack about an opening because said 2100 player isn't playing the opening actively at that time, he is actually right this time.

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 is NOT a Grunfeld. It's the Veresov! No c4 = No Grunfeld!

X_PLAYER_J_X

Nov 21, 2015

0

#25

ThrillerFan wrote:

As much of an imbecile that NoSoupForYou is for saying that a 2100 player like me doesn't know jack about an opening because said 2100 player isn't playing the opening actively at that time, he is actually right this time.

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 is NOT a Grunfeld. It's the Veresov! No c4 = No Grunfeld!

The line is named the Gruenfeld.

Queen Pawn Game/Veresov Attack/Two Knights System/Gruenfeld Defense

1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bg5 Nbd7 4.Nf3 g6

White is playing the Veresov Attack/ Two Knights system.

Black is playing the Gruenfeld Defense.

Together both players are playing the:

Queen Pawn Game/Veresov Attack/Two Knights System/Gruenfeld Defense

It takes 2 people to tango.

NoSoupForYou is an imbecile and he is a wrong imbecile.

Whether he believes the position to be a completely different system or not the fact remains the line is still named the Gruenfeld Defense.

You can call them 1 line

or

You can call them 2 lines

Bottom line black can use similar idea's in all lines.

The move 2...d5 by black helps control e4 square.

3.Bg5 is trying to remove a defender of the e4 square.

3...Nd7 reinforces the knight so if bishop takes black can recapture with a knight to maintain the control of e4.

This line is a better version of Gruenfeld because black can keep control of e4.

Furthermore, Black can still try and target d4 with c5 later if he choses to switch target.

ThrillerFan

Nov 21, 2015

0

#26

X_PLAYER_J_X wrote:

ThrillerFan wrote:

As much of an imbecile that NoSoupForYou is for saying that a 2100 player like me doesn't know jack about an opening because said 2100 player isn't playing the opening actively at that time, he is actually right this time.

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 is NOT a Grunfeld. It's the Veresov! No c4 = No Grunfeld!

The line is named the Gruenfeld.

Queen Pawn Game/Veresov Attack/Two Knights System/Gruenfeld Defense

1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bg5 Nbd7 4.Nf3 g6

White is playing the Veresov Attack/ Two Knights system.

Black is playing the Gruenfeld Defense.

Together both players are playing the:

Queen Pawn Game/Veresov Attack/Two Knights System/Gruenfeld Defense

It takes 2 people to tango.

NoSoupForYou is an imbecile and he is a wrong imbecile.

Whether he believes the position to be a completely different system or not the fact remains the line is still named the Gruenfeld Defense.

You can call them 1 line

or

You can call them 2 lines

Bottom line black can use similar idea's in all lines.

The move 2...d5 by black helps control e4 square.

3.Bg5 is trying to remove a defender of the e4 square.

3...Nd7 reinforces the knight so if bishop takes black can recapture with a knight to maintain the control of e4.

This line is a better version of Gruenfeld because black can keep control of e4.

Furthermore, Black can still try and target d4 with c5 later if he choses to switch target.

Look moron! We don't need a lecture by someone that has no clue what he's talking about. And your speel in post 23 is useless as the topic of this thread is the Veresov, fool!

The Veresov is 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bg5 OR 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Bg5

To claim that the Veresov is a "Grunfeld" is like Claiming a "Pirc" is a "King's Indian Defense" simply because Black's moves are the same. THEY ARE NOT!

After 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3, 2...d5 3.Bg5 leads to the Veresov unless play proceeds 3...e6 4.e4 (White has independent lines, but 4.e4 is a direct Transposition to the French), most other moves will transpose to something else. 2...c5 3.d5 e5 is the Closed Benoni (not to be confused with the Czech Benoni where White's c-pawn is on c4).

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d6 3.e4 g6 is a direct Transposition to the Pirc Defense.

However, in NONE of these cases do you have a Grunfeld, no matter how much you want to argue it, FOOL!

Quasimorphy

Nov 21, 2015

0

#27

It doesn't look like a Gruenfeld to me either, but that's what chessgames.com labels it. I have no idea if that's widely accepted nomenclature for it or even if that nomenclature extends beyond chessgames.com.

Quasimorphy

Nov 21, 2015

0

#28

FWIW, neither of my Veresov books calls defending against the Veresov in that manner a Gruenfeld.

ThrillerFan

Nov 21, 2015

0

#29

Quasimorphy wrote:

It doesn't look like a Gruenfeld to me either, but that's what chessgames.com labels it. I have no idea if that's widely accepted nomenclature for it or even if that nomenclature extends beyond chessgames.com.

No, even chessgames.com doesn't label it the Grunfeld:

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessopening?eco=D01

Quasimorphy

Nov 22, 2015

0

#30

Some of the games are labeled that way.

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1407925

Quasimorphy

Nov 22, 2015

0

#31

That's what it's called in the Openings section here at chess.com, too.

http://www.chess.com/opening/eco/D01_Queens_Pawn_Game_Veresov_Attack_Two_Knights_System_Gruenfeld_Defense

ThrillerFan

Nov 22, 2015

0

#32

Quasimorphy wrote:

That's what it's called in the Openings section here at chess.com, too.

http://www.chess.com/opening/eco/D01_Queens_Pawn_Game_Veresov_Attack_Two_Knights_System_Gruenfeld_Defense

Chess.com can make up whatever names they want. Chess.com doesn't understand sh*t about naming openings.

There are NUMEROUS ERRORS, and calling that some 4-name openings clearly says a moron came up with the name. Simply put, it's the Richter-Veresov!

Just to prove the point about how messed up chess.com is at naming openings, go to page where you start a correspondence game (what they call "online chess"). Now use the dropdown, and select the Sicilian Defense Paulsen Variation.

What they label the Paulsen Variation is NOT the Paulsen. The Paulsen Variation is another name for the Kan Variation. They are one in the same.

What they call the Paulsen is actually an inferior line of the Taimanov Sicilian (1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6 5.Nc3 a6). The more modern treatment and superior move is 5...Qc7 and only then 6...a6.

Again, the Paulsen and the Kan are one in the same thing!

Another one that's wrong! What they call the "Closed Variation". 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 is NOT the Closed Sicilian. It is unknown what it is. After 2...Nc6, 3.g3 is now the Closed Sicilian, 3.f4 is the Grand Prix Attack, and 3.Nf3 followed by 4.d4 is the Open Sicilian.

So don't trust any naming conventions that Chess.com uses. A large qunatity of them are just outright wrong!

Quasimorphy

Nov 22, 2015

0

#33

I wouldn't call it a Gruenfeld Defense because there's no c4 from White, so I'm with you there. I don't think I would even call it the Gruenfeld Defense to the Veresov Attack or even the Gruenfeld Variation of the Veresov, mainly because that implies that Gruenfeld(the man) was instrumental in developing that approach to defending against the Veresov and I have no idea if that is the case. It needs some sort of a name though--Veresov King's Fianchetto Defense, maybe?

X_PLAYER_J_X

Nov 22, 2015

0

#34

Quasimorphy wrote:

I wouldn't call it a Gruenfeld Defense because there's no c4 from White, so I'm with you there. I don't think I would even call it the Gruenfeld Defense to the Veresov Attack or even the Gruenfeld Variation of the Veresov, mainly because that implies that Gruenfeld(the man) was instrumental in developing that approach to defending against the Veresov and I have no idea if that is the case. It needs some sort of a name though--Veresov King's Fianchetto Defense, maybe?

Quasimorphy you do not have to agree with them pal stand your ground.

They might be higher ranked.

They might even have a title.

However, you are using a ECO code which means they are trolling morons.

ECO D01

Queen Pawn Game, Veresov Attack, Two Knights System/Gruenfeld Defense

1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bg5 Nbd7 4.Nf3 g6

They said chess.com database is wrong.

I guess they think chess tempo database is wrong as well.

http://chesstempo.com/gamedb

Master chess open database is wrong as well.

http://www.masterchessopen.com/eco-code-d01-d05-on-chess-boards.html

Everyone is wrong except for them?

I find it amusing and funny.

What is even more funny is the statement Pfren said.

pfren wrote:

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 is Grunfeld as much as x_patzer is literate.

lit·er·ate

ˈlidərət/

adjective

adjective: literate

1.

(of a person) able to read and write.

I am communicating my thoughts purely by reading and writing on this "chess forum".

HA HA so Pfren bascially made the controversial statement that
1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 is Grunfeld.

Which means he is wrong again because both white and black position is still yet undefined.

HA HA HA

After 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Bg5

White is playing the Veresov Attack

Black position is undefined as of yet.

If black continues with 3...e6 than black is playing the Classical Defense

At which point:

White would be playing Veresov Attack

Black would be playing Classical Defense

Together they are playing Veresov Attack,Classical Defense which is under Queen Pawn Opening section.

If black continues with 3...Ne4 than black is playing the Boyce Defense.

At which point:

White would be playing Veresov Attack

Black would be playing Boyce Defense

Together they are playing Veresov Attack,Boyce Defense which is under Queen Pawn Opening section.

If black continues with 3...Nd7 than black position is undefined.

After 4.Nf3 by white than the black position gets named.

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Bg5 Nd7 4.Nf3

The line black is playing is now called the Two Knights system.

Thus, the position will read.

White would be playing Veresov Attack

Black would be playing Two Knights system

Together they are playing Veresov Attack, Two Knights system.

In the Two Knights system black has the option of playing a sub line which involves 4...g6

It is called the Gruenfeld Defense.

Thus, the position will read.

White would be playing Veresov Attack

Black would be playing Two Knights system/Gruenfeld Defense

Together they are playing Veresov Attack, Two Knights system/Gruenfeld Defense.

Some databases will ommit the Two knights system part and show it as Veresov Attack, Gruenfeld Defense.

Some databases will ommit the Gruenfeld Defense part and show it as Veresov Attack, Two Knights system.

However, It should be correctly stated as the Veresov Attack, Two Knights system/Gruenfeld Defense.

Which arises after these moves 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Bg5 Nd7 4.Nf3 g6

X_PLAYER_J_X

Nov 22, 2015

0

#35

Lastly to address Thriller post below:

ThrillerFan wrote:

Look moron! We don't need a lecture by someone that has no clue what he's talking about. And your speel in post 23 is useless as the topic of this thread is the Veresov, fool!

The Veresov is 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bg5 OR 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Bg5

To claim that the Veresov is a "Grunfeld" is like Claiming a "Pirc" is a "King's Indian Defense" simply because Black's moves are the same. THEY ARE NOT!

After 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3, 2...d5 3.Bg5 leads to the Veresov unless play proceeds 3...e6 4.e4 (White has independent lines, but 4.e4 is a direct Transposition to the French), most other moves will transpose to something else. 2...c5 3.d5 e5 is the Closed Benoni (not to be confused with the Czech Benoni where White's c-pawn is on c4).

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d6 3.e4 g6 is a direct Transposition to the Pirc Defense.

However, in NONE of these cases do you have a Grunfeld, no matter how much you want to argue it, FOOL!

Good opening to play against d4 Nf6 Nc3

Only moron in this thread is you Thriller ^^^^ 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 does not classify the position a Veresov Attack?

Furthermore, White can not force the position into a Veresov Attack.

Simply because it is black to move.

The person who showed a Veresov Attack on post #3 was not the OP.

After the post was shown the OP said he didn't know if he would play the move 2...d5

What I said on post #23 helped the OP because he likes playing the Gruenfeld.

At which point I do not see why he doesn't play the other Gruenfeld as well.

He can play the Gruenfeld.

If he doesn't want to play 2...d5

Than the OP can play 2...g6 or 2...d6

ThrillerFan

Nov 22, 2015

0

#36

X_PLAYER_J_X wrote:

Lastly to address Thriller post below:

ThrillerFan wrote:

Look moron! We don't need a lecture by someone that has no clue what he's talking about. And your speel in post 23 is useless as the topic of this thread is the Veresov, fool!

The Veresov is 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bg5 OR 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Bg5

To claim that the Veresov is a "Grunfeld" is like Claiming a "Pirc" is a "King's Indian Defense" simply because Black's moves are the same. THEY ARE NOT!

After 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3, 2...d5 3.Bg5 leads to the Veresov unless play proceeds 3...e6 4.e4 (White has independent lines, but 4.e4 is a direct Transposition to the French), most other moves will transpose to something else. 2...c5 3.d5 e5 is the Closed Benoni (not to be confused with the Czech Benoni where White's c-pawn is on c4).

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d6 3.e4 g6 is a direct Transposition to the Pirc Defense.

However, in NONE of these cases do you have a Grunfeld, no matter how much you want to argue it, FOOL!

Good opening to play against d4 Nf6 Nc3

Only moron in this thread is you Thriller ^^^^ 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 does not classify the position a Veresov Attack?

Furthermore, White can not force the position into a Veresov Attack.

Simply because it is black to move.

The person who showed a Veresov Attack on post #3 was not the OP.

After the post was shown the OP said he didn't know if he would play the move 2...d5

What I said on post #23 helped the OP because he likes playing the Gruenfeld.

At which point I do not see why he doesn't play the other Gruenfeld as well.

He can play the Gruenfeld.

If he doesn't want to play 2...d5

Than the OP can play 2...g6 or 2...d6

Look, if you are going to try to quote people, quote what they said you GDMF'ing MORON!

NOWHERE DID I EVER SAY THAT 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 IS A VERESOV!

RE-READ POST 26, FOOL!

QUOTE: "The Veresov is 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bg5 OR 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Bg5"

AND: "After 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3, 2...d5 3.Bg5 leads to the Veresov unless play proceeds 3...e6 4.e4 (White has independent lines, but 4.e4 is a direct Transposition to the French), most other moves will transpose to something else. 2...c5 3.d5 e5 is the Closed Benoni (not to be confused with the Czech Benoni where White's c-pawn is on c4)."

NOWHERE IN THAT GDMF'ING MESSAGE DID I EVER SAY THAT 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 IS A VERESOV, AND NOWHERE DID I EVER SAY IT WAS WHITE TO MOVE AT THAT POINT, FOOL!

IF YOU ARE GOING TO GO AROUND CORRECTING PEOPLE, GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF WHERE THE SUN DOESN'T SHINE, AND QUOTE PEOPLE PROPERLY! MAYBE YOU WOULDN'T SOUND LIKE SUCH A MORON IF YOU LEARNED SOME COMMON SENSE!

X_PLAYER_J_X

Nov 22, 2015

0

#37

dpnorman wrote:

X_PLAYER_JX It is painful to read all of what you wrote lol

It is not "a Grunfeld". It is a different opening which some people happen to name after Grunfeld. It falls outside the spectrum of openings which can be considered Grunfelds due to the lack of a pawn on c4.

I'm sorry you wasted all that time writing such a long response- most of what you wrote is wrong, I'm afraid :(

And even if it were right, the names of the openings isn't something worth writing a post that long about, or spending that much time studying. Just learn how to play them properly

If it is a different opening like you say and it is named after Grunfeld.

Than why are people confused when I say the OP should play the Grunfeld????

You know there are 2 lines named the Chigorin Defense in chess.

One Chigorin line is played against 1.e4

The other Chigorin line is played against 1.d4

When ever some1 plays either of those lines the name of the line they say they are playing is the Chigorin.

You see dpnorman when you see situations like this on a forum you just have to sit back and laugh.

NM dpnorman

Nov 22, 2015

0

#38

People are confused because for you to play the "Grunfeld Defense", white has to allow it, by playing the moves d4 AND c4. Without the pawn on c4, the position is very different! Two openings cannot be the same if there's a significant structural difference!

This is a very simple concept which any 1100 player would be expected to understand...

ThrillerFan

Nov 22, 2015

0

#39

Give it up dpnorman - clearly his IQ is below 40.

He even thinks there are two Chigorin Defenses.

There is only 1! One is a "Defense", the other is a "Variation"!

Chigorin "Defense": 1.d4 d5 2.c4 Nc6

Chigorin "Variation" of the "Ruy Lopez": 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.O-O Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 O-O 9.h3 Na5

X_PLAYER_J_X

Nov 22, 2015

0

#40

ThrillerFan wrote:

X_PLAYER_J_X wrote:

Lastly to address Thriller post below:

ThrillerFan wrote:

Look moron! We don't need a lecture by someone that has no clue what he's talking about. And your speel in post 23 is useless as the topic of this thread is the Veresov, fool!

The Veresov is 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bg5 OR 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Bg5

To claim that the Veresov is a "Grunfeld" is like Claiming a "Pirc" is a "King's Indian Defense" simply because Black's moves are the same. THEY ARE NOT!

After 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3, 2...d5 3.Bg5 leads to the Veresov unless play proceeds 3...e6 4.e4 (White has independent lines, but 4.e4 is a direct Transposition to the French), most other moves will transpose to something else. 2...c5 3.d5 e5 is the Closed Benoni (not to be confused with the Czech Benoni where White's c-pawn is on c4).

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d6 3.e4 g6 is a direct Transposition to the Pirc Defense.

However, in NONE of these cases do you have a Grunfeld, no matter how much you want to argue it, FOOL!

Good opening to play against d4 Nf6 Nc3

Only moron in this thread is you Thriller ^^^^ 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 does not classify the position a Veresov Attack?

Furthermore, White can not force the position into a Veresov Attack.

Simply because it is black to move.

The person who showed a Veresov Attack on post #3 was not the OP.

After the post was shown the OP said he didn't know if he would play the move 2...d5

What I said on post #23 helped the OP because he likes playing the Gruenfeld.

At which point I do not see why he doesn't play the other Gruenfeld as well.

He can play the Gruenfeld.

If he doesn't want to play 2...d5

Than the OP can play 2...g6 or 2...d6

Look, if you are going to try to quote people, quote what they said you GDMF'ing MORON!

NOWHERE DID I EVER SAY THAT 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 IS A VERESOV!

RE-READ POST 26, FOOL!

QUOTE: "The Veresov is 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bg5 OR 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Bg5"

AND: "After 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3, 2...d5 3.Bg5 leads to the Veresov unless play proceeds 3...e6 4.e4 (White has independent lines, but 4.e4 is a direct Transposition to the French), most other moves will transpose to something else. 2...c5 3.d5 e5 is the Closed Benoni (not to be confused with the Czech Benoni where White's c-pawn is on c4)."

NOWHERE IN THAT GDMF'ING MESSAGE DID I EVER SAY THAT 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 IS A VERESOV, AND NOWHERE DID I EVER SAY IT WAS WHITE TO MOVE AT THAT POINT, FOOL!

IF YOU ARE GOING TO GO AROUND CORRECTING PEOPLE, GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF WHERE THE SUN DOESN'T SHINE, AND QUOTE PEOPLE PROPERLY! MAYBE YOU WOULDN'T SOUND LIKE SUCH A MORON IF YOU LEARNED SOME COMMON SENSE!

I will show POST 26 AGAIN FOR YOU

ThrillerFan wrote:

Look moron! We don't need a lecture by someone that has no clue what he's talking about. And your speel in post 23 is useless as the topic of this thread is the Veresov, fool!

The Veresov is 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bg5 OR 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.Bg5

To claim that the Veresov is a "Grunfeld" is like Claiming a "Pirc" is a "King's Indian Defense" simply because Black's moves are the same. THEY ARE NOT!

After 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3, 2...d5 3.Bg5 leads to the Veresov unless play proceeds 3...e6 4.e4 (White has independent lines, but 4.e4 is a direct Transposition to the French), most other moves will transpose to something else. 2...c5 3.d5 e5 is the Closed Benoni (not to be confused with the Czech Benoni where White's c-pawn is on c4).

1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d6 3.e4 g6 is a direct Transposition to the Pirc Defense.

However, in NONE of these cases do you have a Grunfeld, no matter how much you want to argue it, FOOL!

The Topic Title of this thread is the big green header at the top.

Good opening to play against d4 Nf6 Nc3

Once you read the big green header you should understand it is not the Veresov which means you claiming 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nc3 as a Veresov thread wrong!

As for my color choice of red and green.

I decided to use those colors since we are approaching Christmas!

I am keeping in the Christmas Spirit.

I am happy you have seen the error of your ways.

Hopefully my early Christmas gift of sharing the knowledge of the Veresov starting position has helped you understand the Veresov move order more better.

Your welcome buddy.