Nimzowitsch Defense, what's best against 2.Nf3?

I wanted some opinions.  I took about a 2 year break from the Nimzowitsch to learn some other openings.  I want to play it again because I love the line 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 e5 3.d5 Nce7...

The problem is I've never played e4 e5 games a day in my life.  I'd rather something people don't see every day, a position I know better than my opponent.  So after 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3, what would you do.

1.  There's a line where you play d6, Bg4 and then e6 that I'm pretty sure Tony Miles played.

2. There's d6 and a pirc transposition.  This is recommended in the book The Dark Knight System and I have the book, I just struggle learning from chess books.  Anyway, there's a funny line where white plays an early d5 and the knight goes back to g8.  I've done well in those lines.  The most critical appears to be white playing e5 before you get a chance to.  

3. The Colorado Gambit, 2.f5.  It's not entirely sound. I'm playing at the 1300 level and do ok with it, but I'd like something that could give me fighting chances against 1800-2000 players.

4. e6 and a transposition to a French with the c pawn blocked in.

5.Alehkine's Defense?  Wouldn't that be a normal Alehkine's after 2.Nf6?  

6.Scandinavian.  This is recommended in a chess.com video called "The Modern Nimzowitsch".  I tried it and felt uncomfortable with my queen on a5.  It felt dirty and wrong.  And I even lost my queen putting it there once.  

Anyway, those are all the options I could think of.  Right now, I'm playing 2.f5 for no real reason other than my opponents get themselves in trouble against it, but it's not that hard to find the most critical lines.  Bb5, Ne5 and black is not having any fun.  What would you play, other than e5.

According to my opening book, it isn't a problem. I don't care for it myself, but then I wouldn't play Nc6. I don't think e5 is a threat: Nobody plays that because normally you have dxe and Nd7 and the pawn is attacked. There is not a huge difference between option 1 and 2, except of course for g6 and Bg7. You could run into an early d5 attacking the c6 knight, but you're used to that.

I can't help with your option 3.

I would not play the French with a knight on c6. It's blocking the c-pawn so you can't pressure white.

I think 5 and 6 are playable transpositions. 

Some opinion about your options...

1 : ok playable although i wouldn't advice it to anybody. The thing is that i wouldn't recommend 1...Nc6 anyway (but here it is not the point)...

2 : why not

3 : crap

4 : e6 could be a nice option if u really transpose to Nc6 french, which happens after 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nc6 or Guimard's variation of Tarrash after 3.Nd2 Nc6. But if white doesn't play Nc3, like e5, u get a strange version of advance french with Nc6. U lose c5 idea, maybe u can go for f6 but just compare with the Nimzowitch line 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 followed by f6 (same position, almost, with Bf5 out of pawn chain)...

5 : Alekhine => bad transposition! 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 Nf6? 3.e5 where u obtain an Alekhine where u played Nc6 too soon. For example

Do u want to play this kind of position? I hope not.

5 : Nc6 scandinavian is often seen as a mistake for black. For instance,

maybe not as dubious as Colorado but not really good...

To sum up, only 1 and 2 are viable in my opinion.

Thanks guys.  As for the Scandinavian, they covered Bb5 as the main threat in the video and did say "theory considers it better for white" and then said something about it being a complex question that you can answer in different ways and it's not horrible yada yad yada.  I don't want to play that way, though.  https://www.chess.com/video/player/the-modern-nimzowitsch

I have the most information on the pirc setup since it's covered in the book.  I would love for the Colorado gambit to be playable.  I saw that an IM recommended it on a DVD about gambit opening repertoires so I was hoping to hear somebody say it's not so bad. I'm sure I could win with it at the 1300 level but I don't want to start over from scratch when I improve.  

Anyway, I'm comfortable with all the 2.d4 lines.  I've studied and played other defenses just so I can learn more about different ways of playing for the past year or two.  It's been a long break form Nc6, but I just didn't enjoy anything as much as I like the Kennedy Advance, which is the most common response I see.  Here's a random trap line in that variation.  I don't ever see it.  I usually just get the knights to f4 and either h5 or h4, open the f file, queen to g6 and attack on the kingside. White can force you to focus on the queen-side in some lines, and I'm learning more about how to do that with the book.  

comeaux, unfortunately the sad fact is this, when white plays 2.Nf3 black is no longer playing the nimzowitsch. He will just be transposing into a sideline of some other kp defence. This is the reason that several high level players including several times us champion,joel benjamin have eventually abandoned it. A line that is risky but leads to some interesting (but wild) positions is 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.Nc3 Qf5?! (idea being ..Nb4)

Question for Poucin: I love getting feedback from master level player, so no disrespect, but regarding the #5 position with the pawn  sacrifice, if you consult your engine of choice, you will find this position is perfectly defendable for black, he is cramped/ but he is also getting a pawn for his trouble

I would like to hear your opinion about the 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.Nc3 Qf5?! line i mentioned above. Thanks for the input

goommba88

I think Levon Aronian played that Alekhine position twice a long time ago for some reason and he won those games but there was nothing simple about the play at all. Maybe engines can play it but it's really impractical and White has a lot of ways to play

You don't have to play the Scandinavian with the queen on a5 though. You can play the Qd6 or Qd8 variations as well!

- This Alekhine's variation may be tenable but impractical as penandpaper said.

No book on Alekhine from black's side advocates it as far as I know...

- Qf5? Well u want to try some trick with Nb4, not so threatening and u forget to develop other pieces. Don't be surprised to be punished like this :

Qf5 just hinders Bc8, and queen can be attacked. Big price just for trying to snatch a pawn...

lol... It never ceases to amaze me how a few of the posters on here will know a game for every random opening variation someone brings up.  And it's always on point and useful... just unreal.  

2.  f5 by black is reasonable, called the colorado gambit. Study it sometime, black has chances. 2. f6 by black is a blunder if you ask me.

When I play 1...Nc6, I respond to 2.Nf3 with #1, but it sometimes becomes #2 depending on how white responds. I've done well with it against players <2300, but against >2300 players, I play more mainstream stuff than 1...Nc6.

As much as I hate to agree with anything StupidGM writes, he's actually right in this case (except for that little insult stuck in at the end, "if one is a weak player" etc.). Moreover, the line he gave is only one of multiple ways that white can get an advantage in this opening. This is exactly why I play it only sparingly and only against masters and below. It does two things: (1) create an unbalanced position where white can't dry out the game and go for a draw against the stronger player, and (2) hide my real opening repertoire from the IMs and GMs I may play in later rounds, if/when they stop by to look at my game.

However, if all one does is book up on inferior openings in order to refute them, and neglect all study of actual chess (you know, middlegame strategy, tactics, endgame technique), a.k.a. the method of "improvement" recommended by StupidGM, what will happen is you will get an opening advantage against a higher-rated player who plays e.g. 1...Nc6 - and then fail to convert it and be outplayed. I've done this (outplay, not be outplayed) a number of times.

Gj_chess on youtube has a great series on the Nimzowitsch. He has a master rating and plays the colorado gambit. I played it for some time and had pretty good results with it. He also recommends the Ne7 line after d5. 

GJ_Chess cannot be more than about 1500.

No serious master would make a series called "Dirty chess tricks".

Congrats in your two min assessment of his channel.  I'm sure you must be right.

White has to be very careful in how he plays. It's so rare to encounter it, and if white isn't careful he loses his advantage and black quickly has the advantage. White's lines aren't always intuitive.

 I think the Nimzowitsch and the Colorado Gambit are great lines for IM and under players for this reason. Just have to put in the work. 

I've seen his videos.  His Colorado Gambit series has some holes in it.  There's one line where he gives a continuation that an engine grades as +.2 for white, but ignores a move that gives white a +1.7 advantage.  I looked for ways around it.  There's nothing that I would want to play seriously.  It's busted.  I'll continue to play it in 3 minute games but that's about it.

You make a good point, and I love gambits.  I've been playing more aggressively as white and throwing caution to the wind lately.  Here's the thing... I'm signing up for a USCF Membership today.  The Paul Morphy Open is in New Orleans this weekend.  If I enter and play people I've never met, I'd play the Colorado Gambit in a second.  But every week there's rated games and the same people always show up.  I can't play the Colorado Gambit week in and week out against the same guys. I need a second option. 

you are my role model sir