how to beat the trompowsky?

Why h5?

it creates a pawn blockade on the light squares and a bishop blockade on the dark squares

actually, 2...c5 is reccomended is Alburt and Dzindzi's repetoire book.

Click our logo to join.

I have Andrew Soltis, The Trompowsky Attack (1995), which does not have your line.
Against 2...e6, Soltis gives 3.e5.
He offers 3.Bxf6 if Black plays 2...d5.

Bro this is very old forum

And still relevant as I beat the Trompowsky in an OTB tournament game on Sunday.

Who is trompowsky

Octavio Trompowsky (1897-1984) was champion of Brasil in 1939.

Thanks

It's still pretty funny that you suddenly decided to answer a 17 year old question. How and why did you dig up this topic anyway?

Google led me here. 
Likesforests question had not been answered.

Why answer a 17 year old question, of a user who hasn't been on the site for 14 years, in a thread that has been dormant for 11 years?

Most current threads are garbage.

Likesforests asked a good question that deserved an answer. The site is accessible, searchable, and came up when I was looking for information of beating the Trompowsky.
That's why.
Quality information does not go out of date.
If you want a chess site where every thread more than a week old is dead, go to Lichess.
BTW, you're asking a question that was answered in the post above yours.

You are adding to the garbage by necroing dead, irrelevant threads.

When it comes to opening books quality information goes out of date very quickly. A 30 year old opening book is as interesting and relevant as a forum thread that has been dormant for 11 years.

Not all questions require or deserve an answer. If a question on a thread has been left unanswered for nearly as long as the FIDE Men's Classical World Chess champion has been alive, it should have been safe to assume that user has already found their answer or no longer cares about the question. By assuming that there is still relevance and interest in an answer, you are talking to a brick wall and drawing others in with your exercise in futility.

At your level and even mine, opening theory 150 years old remains relevant. I’ve beat many 1500s with theory that is more than 400 years old.

If you’re not interested, ignore the thread.

If my fifth round opponent on Sunday had read that ancient book, I would have had a tougher game.

She had a nearly even game against an International Master in round four until she made some inaccuracies in time pressure.

Incidentally, Likeforests’ idea to which I responded was bad when the book I mentioned was published, was bad when he asked the question, and is bad now.

If you want to discuss a topic that's been discussed before I actually don't see how it's better to make a new thread, you just wind up with 300 threads on the same topic where the same things must be said again and again.
On some better moderated forums duplicate threads even get shut down. 
Maybe 2 weeks ago there was another thread on the Trompowsky where many good recommendations were given for black.

But posting in an old thread is something that certain people on here cannot cope with

If there was a better thread two weeks ago, it did not come up in my search.

By the way, my game Sunday began:

Real help bro