Rock Solid Opening for Black: the Scandinavian with 3..Qd6

Qd6 4. Knb5  You might as well Qd8 No? Or never 2.d5 Isn't there so much better response to e4 then this? e5 or c5 has and always will be the answer to e4. It is known.

My two correspondence wins are in the 4.d4 Nf6 5.Nf3 c6 (I think 5...a6 is decidely inferior) 6.g3 Bg4 line. Both played in the trails of a Caruana- Tiviakov game.

Maybe Black has to play 6...g6 against that line, I'm not fond at all of Bg4/Bf5.

This is the picture after ...a6 and ...Bg4. Occured on the board several times, mostly correspondence games.

To cut a long story short: It's disgusting. To be avoided like the plague.

One of the serious books on 3..Qd6 was: Michael Melts - Scandinavian Defense: The Dynamic 3...Qd6. I am glad to hear that Kotronias wrote a book about 3..Qd6. He has a important game against Tiviakov.

Also there are important theoretical articles in New in Chess by Tiviakov and Sergey Kasparov.

But the aim is to teach players with a rating 1000-1500 a solid system and to spend more time learning middle- and endgames.

On the level mentioned most of the players don`t play the mainlines, so it is important for the learning student to deal with basic middlegame structures.

Thank you pfren for the information.

Vassilios Kotronias: The Safest Scandinavian, Chess Stars 2016

"Today I believe that the 3...Qd6 Scandinavian is a safe and sound opening for all levels. I have spent so many hours trying to refute it, bashing my head against its solid walls, only to end up respecting it myself. The fruits of my work and analyses are presented below. I included games played before 20.1.2016" Kotronias

Well, the truth is that Vassilis was using databases and engines since the late nineties, and I was his technical assistant (since he was a Grandmaster at chess, and a beginner at computers). I can still recall the horror which followed a harddisk failure, with a ton of personal work in it, and no recent backups.

Of course he did not trust engines, which were weak by then, nor he blindly trusts them now. I was surprised he took up such an opening (sharp stuff has always been his bread and butter) as well as his change of publisher from Quality Chess. I know no details- all I know is that this ought to be a fine book, on par with the very high analytical standards he has set on his previous efforts. Maybe this book is not "GM Series" stuff, but I am sure it is not a book for (near) beginners, either.

The Melts book had a ton of material, but unfortunately it was almost unreadable- horrible layout and checkproofing.

Solid are the Berlin and the Caro Kann, the Scandinavian is just playable, and funny too.

GM Spragget annotated the humiliating defeat of the Qd6 Scandinavian by Shirov over Tiviakov 2010. I tried to include the notes, but it won't go through the Chess.com software, so I'm posting the PGN below:

[Event "Unive Crown Group"] [Site "Hoogeveen NED"] [Date "2010.10.26"] [Round "2"] [White "Shirov,A"] [Black "Tiviakov,S"] [Result "1-0"] [WhiteELO ""] [BlackELO ""] [[Eco "B01"] [Annotator "GM Spraggett"] [Source ""]  1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 3. Nc3 Qd6!? 4. d4 Nf6 5. Nf3 c6 6. Ne5 Nbd7 7. f4!? {This appears to be Shirov's patent, having already played it successfully  on several previous occasions.  The Knight on e5 is now solidly implanted inside Black's territory and is quite annoying.  Trading it off requires some preparation and Black must be careful not to ignore his own development in the meantime.} Nb6!? ({Too passive is} 7... e6?! 8. g4! c5 9. g5 Nd5 10. Ne4 Qc7 11. c4 {with a big edge, as in  Shirov- Kurkowski  at the 2010 Scarborough CC Shirov simul}) 8. g4! {A super-aggressive move typical of Alexi's style.  White wastes no time gaining space and already threatening to push Black's pieces back.  Nisipeanu , in 2007, now tried 8...g6 against Shirov and was able to make a draw, but only after some suffering.  No doubt Tiviakov was aware of this game and did not want to see what improvement White had up his sleeve....} Nbd5!? 9. Bg2!? ({This appears to be a new move, 2 other games in my database continued with the immediate 9.g5  Perhaps Alexi had prepared it at home, or perhaps he simply did not want to go into the line} 9.g5 Nxc3 10 bxc3 Qd5!?) g6 10. g5 Nxc3 11. bxc3 Nd5 12. c4! {Black is pushed back, but has a solid position without any real weaknesses} Nc7 13. c5 Qd8 {No doubt Tiviakov was satisfied with his position, he has d5 and f5 under control.  White has pushed  back Black's pieces but at the price of creating a lot of weaknesses in his pawn structure; Black need only find the time to develop his pieces and then play ...f6 and ...Ne6 to have White on a full scale retreat!  And the immediate sacrifice on c6 (2 pieces for a Rook and 2 pawns) could quickly turn against White.} 14. d5!!! {The move that was supposed to be impossible!  This is the remarkable thing that I mentioned earlier about Shirov's attacking games: while most other attackers would have avoided this position for the reasons given in the previous note, Alexi's resourcefulness, imagination and tremendous energy allow him to seek hidden ideas that justify his seemingly reckless up the board and 'Dam the Consequences' style of attacking! Often I am reminded by similarities between Shirov's style of play and that of the young Paul Keres (1916-1975, Estonia).  Keres' attacking skills were second to none in terms of bravura.  Witness the following example taken from a game against former world champion Max Euwe, remarkably similar to the Tiviakov game: see below} cxd5!? ({Now if} 14... Nxd5?! {Black gets into worse trouble than in the game after} 15. c4! f6 {forced as retreating will lose material}  16. cxd5 fxe5 17. Qa4! Bd7 18. dxc6 bxc6 19. Bb2 {and it is difficult to suggest a constructive move for Black.})15. c4! ({Another powerful blow to Black's center! If now} 15. c4 Bg7 16. cxd5 O-O 17. O-O (17. Bb2 f6) 17... Bf5 18. Qb3 Rb8 19. Be3 {and White dominates the game. Horrible as it may appear, perhaps this is what Black should seriously consider playing! Or if}) (15. c4 Be6? 16. cxd5 Bxd5 17. Qa4! {and Black can call it quits...}) e6!? {There is really nothing better, though it weakens the dark squares considerably!  I think Tiviakov must have been worried about his position at this point.  In particular, Black has no obvious reply to White's next 'natural' move} 16. Bb2! {As natural as a baby's smile....White threatens indirectly the Rook on h8. Moving it to g8 [16...Rg8] seems  laughable, and simple moves such as 17.Rc1 continue to pile on the pressure.  In particular, where will Black put his King?} Bg7 17. Nc6! {Great champions make it seem easy!   After the forced exchange of White's Knight for the Black Bishop on g7, White will become unchallenged master of the dark squares in Black's camp.  Worse still, Black's remaining pieces will have no good squares.  Black is completely helpless!} bxc6 18. Bxg7 Rg8 19. Be5! Bd7 20. O-O Rb8 21. Qa4 Rb7 22. Rab1 Qc8 23. Rxb7 Qxb7 24. Rf2 d4 25. Qa5 Kd8 26. Be4 1-0      {I almost feel sorry for Tiviakov here!  Without committing any perceptible error, he has a position that looks as though he is a beginner in a simul against the local champion....White needs only castle, put a Rook on the b-file and play Qa4  to make the pressure unbearable.  I invite the readers to take a look at how Shirov put away his opponent in just a handful more move.  A great effort by Shirov!}

What are you, a parrot?  I learned the Berlin defence before I was 10 years old, and about 15 years later was playing it successfully against one of the two strongest correspondence players in North America (Richard Callaghan, who attended my club in Charlottesville VA as did US Women's Championship contender Ruth Donnelly; Richard was 2500+ at correspondence if I recall, and this was in the 80s, so no engines) when I was in my early/mid-20s .  

This was over 15 years before Kramnik beat Kasparov, so frankly I don't know where this baloney about the Berlin supposedly having since become impossible for class players to understand has come from, and the worst part is not hearing from titled players, who are "entitled", but having it then being cluelessly parroted.  With titled players at least when you ask they can give you a reasonable explanation, but when it comes from class players and you ask "why not" they have no clue how to answer

Of course they are a myriad of ~1300 rated players who think they understand the Berlin Wall ending... so be it.

Well... I don't really understand it, and I'm rated a tad over 2300- even after reading the superb chapter on the "Wall-Y" by Kotronias (in his "Grandmaster's Battle Manual"). I don't get disheartened though, as in the analysed games quite a few 2600+ rated players commit some serious errors, with both colors. At worst I would have played quite a few more errors- so what? That 1300 rated genius at my club would explain me where I went wrong...

If you're referring to my chess.com rating at the moment, you might want to dig in a bit further to see that IT'S BASED ON ONE GAME.  I'm a correspondence chess expert from the same time as I used to play Richard Callaghan the correspondence IM in OTB chess at our club in Charlottesville, VA.  And I'm not saying anything such as it's possible for me or other class players to fully understand the Berlin.  My point really is, at the class level, is it really necessary for one class player to *fully* understand the Berlin, to play it against other class players?  Of course not.

I don't have the games they were from over 25 years ago.  Also refer to my response to pfren above -- I think you and I can find something to agree to disagree upon in there.

The problem with class players playing the Berlin as I understand it isn't that it's hard to understand, although that could certainly be true. The problem is that White gets a decent plus in the Berlin Endgame, and below master level it's harder for Black to draw than it is for White to win.

The only Wall-Y lines that are (relatively) simple are the ones with the ...Be7 and ...Nh4 plan. Actually these are the stuff suggested by GM Kritz in a DVD he has made for Chessbase. However, as Kritz himself has stressed: Black is NOT playing for a win in these lines- his ambition is to draw.

I recall Morozevich playing it against Judit Polgar, Bronstein variation, but I might be altogether wrong, anyway black's bishop goes to b7 (a6,b5) but it was long ago and I'm not playing it anyway.

Maybe I misunderstand the concept of the word "solid". A solid opening means that there are not a big deal of tactics involved, but a fight of strategical ideas, for instance the Stonewall attack/defense. The Scandinavian, whit your queen  early exposed to white pieces attack, is quite tricky, tactically speaking, isn´t it?

I wish chess was that simple.

Black loses more time than in the Qxd5 Scandis in several variations of the Sicilian, or the French. And Black's queen does not have to bounce all over the board in the opening, unless Black plays nonsense.

Look man, memorizing a large amount of 'garbage' is not such a problem, when I was younger I needed less time, now I need more, how's possible, that when I was a young teenager I was able to absorb 3 pages of sentences, I was much faster then, basically 6 pages when you are considering both sides, and in a matter of few hours, and now I can't. I got somehow stupid over the years? Anyway you can as easily become a shooting target when a novelty destroys everything you have learned over the years, at least the caro-kann is less vulnerable.

True, but you can quote me also for calling the most odious living being on the planet mother teresa, but that does not make of that beautiful and kind earthling anything resembling Mother Teresa. At best it's an attempt to remove the central pawns at an early stage of the game, when the lost tempo is not yet felt, placing the queen and the rest of the pieces where they can eventually do harm, in the now somewhat freed up center. How good, time will tell.

This opening is not for every player. When students develop a flexible style, then they can play attacking games but also "boring" defensive games. The Scandinavian Defence is a good choice against players who don`t have the patience to accumulate slow positional advantages and know only attacking chess.

good game