People playing the queen early

This question might seem rethorical, but it isn't.

Why are players still playing the queen at the second or third move? I find this an extremely stupid wway to start the game, a very disturbing one too, cause the very first moves you make you have to be cautious, but if you play right you win. Still, I play to have fun and enjoy some tactics and combinations and a game spent chasing around the opponent's queen after naughty attacks from her, is just a useless game.

Are there real benefits to play the queen so early?? And if yes, which benefits? Can somebody tell me?

Cause to me, it just seems sheer stupidity

The average rating in blitz chess on chess.com is < 1100, which is even 100 points less than what is started with as default.

At that level I can quite believe that getting the queen out early is considered desirable.  It's powerful, it's "fun" and a majority of people don't get the basics of opening development.  That is why they remain around that level.  Those who do understand basic principles move up a few rungs in the ratings.

The only way that I see moving the queen early a good idea is in bullet. You have little time to play your moves, and taking your opponent 'out of book' early is a good idea; especially if you have experience playing that (the Wayward Queen Attack 1.e4 e5 2.Qh5 is probably the most well known opening that involves an early queen move).

The Scandinavian disagrees with you.

Early Queen development is highly desirable in a mis-played King's Gambit or indeed any other opening where white gets a bit cocky with the f-pawn disappearing off the board!

As long as you don't blunder your queen or lose too much time, it's not a bad move.. Hikaru has played the Parham.

I do not know any openings and always move the queen on the second move and got a rating of over 1400 in all 3 live categories.very rarely,may be in 1% of games it gets trapped,otherwise the queen is deadly at the below 1500 level may be even up to 1800.

2..Nf6?! Don't see the point of this..

You tell 'em, SankPeterburg. If you tell them you're tired of chess players making that beginner's mistake, surely they'll all stop.

More seriously, I'm thinking about making a checklist of common errors about which I keep reminding people, then posting that checklist on my blog. Then when I respond to someone on this site who is asking for analysis of their game I can just copy and paste from that list which errors apply to which moves, with links to more details on the blog. I could even do a matrix or Excel type of chart, so that they can see which types of mistakes they are making repeatedly through the game.

With all due respect, I see your rating is ~1400. People are going to be playing that way down at that level. (I should know, Im down at that level, too! Though I dont play that way.) Once you get better and start facing more skilled opponents, you wont see that nearly as much, if ever. Down here with us amateurs, people get tempted by the apparent power of the Queen and dont take into account that shes just a huge target, and theres not much you can trade her for except the other Queen, and even thats not always wise. So if shes threatened, shell usually run, run, run.

Short answer to your question, they just dont know any better.

My idea is to move your Queen up quickly= you will gain control of the other side of the board  

I think that 2...Nf6 requires knowing more theory to execute, but it is 'better' in terms of allowing White more chances to go wrong. Since the Scandi is almost always a secondary opening for people that use it at high levels, 2...Qxd5 makes more sense for them. The utility of Nf6 is felt more at the club level where more players will try to hold the pawn and get into a horrible position.

I agree that the Icelandic is unsound, and I dropped it because I kept getting miserable positions in it and they were too easy for White to find over the board (Literally just one natural move - 5.Nf3, and Black has to do all the thinking in its own pet line from then on). Though I do think Black can hold the draw and achieve some dynamism in that line, it's just too hard to be worth it. Fortunately the Panov is fun from both sides anyway, certainly no harder for Black to defend than the mainline Scandi.

Qxd5 is the more solid option, while the Marshall variation is more dangerous for both sides IMO. I always have trouble playing against the Scandinavian simply because the plans are tricky when black has such a solid structure..

I very much doubt that someone playing Blitz chess against people in the 1100-1200 rating bracket is meeting people playing sharp theory lines in any opening!

What if you're playing classical chess against class A players

Clearly it was a typo you engli ignorant piece of a dog s h i t

ive seen simon williams do this early against GMs, so there is clearly some surprise attack value. however, I then tried it myself and got hammered, ha ha.

What? Why would you say that about 800 rated players? You should think of their feelings. Some of them know a lot more about chess than you think. And I think you could learn a thing or two from them, if you listened to their wisdom.

And here I thought you were one of the believers in the backyard professor.

Because they learned chess from a single sheet of paper that came with a $2 set and all it explained was how the pieces moved.