Sorry Pacifique but the move 2. e5 is terrible as not only does it allow Black to equalize on the 2nd move it even gives Black an advantage.
Now there are even worse moves such as 2. Ba6 which loses immediately.
but in the realm of what many players view as normal moves--2. e5 is the worse.
I will agree that after 1. e4 d5 2. e5 c5 3. b3 is a reasonable attempt to repair the damage.
@Turm_Breuberg - I think ...d4, perhaps as soon as move 4, is the way to play against that system.
No, early d4 is probably not good.
After 3. b3 (there are other moves possible as well) the position is pretty equal. So any attempt to refute this aggressively will just backfire against decend players. Even with 3. Nf3 white is perfectly fine. Just nothing more ....
If you want to punish 2. e5, you have to play very early g5 (Probably allready on 3rd move). Anything else will give white a solid and playble position with just natural moves.
Anyways I would rather play 2. e5 here than start with Bird 1. f4 for example.
2. exd5 is certainly stronger than e5, but that does not make it a "terrible" move. Only imprecise.
Surely black is just playing the caro-kann a tempo up, because he gets c5 in one go instead of the usual c7-c6-c5? That's got to be good for black.
The term "terrible" is relative. The move 2. e5 should get one ? mark for turning a white advantage to an equal game and a 2nd ? mark for turning a white advantage to advantage for black. I see quite a few players do not agree with me that after 1. e4 d5 2. e5 c5 that black already has an advantage.
After 1. e4 d5 2. e5 c5 White occupies the e5 square.
Black occupies the c5 and d5 squares and also is contesting the c4 and d4 and e4 squares--quite a difference. Also White's e5 pawn is over extended.
If say white is given the priviledge of having two moves to start his game. He would or should play 1. e4 and 1 d4 and probably has a theoretical win.
However if he plays 1. e4 and 2. e5 thenhe has no advantage at all.
Sorry Pacifique but the move 2. e5 is terrible as not only does it allow Black to equalize on the 2nd move it even gives Black an advantage.
Now there are even worse moves such as 2. Ba6 which loses immediately.
but in the realm of what many players view as normal moves--2. e5 is the worse.
I will agree that after 1. e4 d5 2. e5 c5 3. b3 is a reasonable attempt to repair the damage.
Sorry ponz111, but your abstract reasoning about "giving Black an advantage" (without being able to back it up with particular lines) is worthless. Here is example how White can have at least no worse position and what can happens if Black overestimates his position.
Pacifique
I just about laughed out loud when I saw 5. ...h5. Of course if Black has a better position and plays badly he could lose.
Actually I gave one reason why Black has the better game and that was center control.
White has a pawn occupying e5
Black has pawns occuplying d5 and c5 and also his two center pawns contest the squares c4 and d4 and e4. This advantage in controling the center gives Black the better game.
If you cannot see this--then not much else I can say...
k
Pacifique
I just about laughed out loud when I saw 5. ...h5. Of course if Black has a better position and plays badly he could lose.
Actually I gave one reason why Black has the better game and that was center control.
White has a pawn occupying e5
Black has pawns occuplying d5 and c5 and also his two center pawns contest the squares c4 and d4 and e4. This advantage in controling the center gives Black the better game.
If you cannot see this--then not much else I can say...
k
5...h5 is not the best idea of course, but the reason of such a moves is overestimating of Black chances. And I`m still awaiting from you particular recommendations for Black to have a better position. I have been played similar positions and can say that your reasoning is laughable. Prove that I`m wrong and show the way to Black advantage.
I can see Black thinking "I have the advantage in the center and the advantage on the queenside but White is slightly better on the kingside--so what should I do? Eureka! I think I will play h5 and make myself more vulnerable on my kingside! Then everyone will say that is a good move because---I am a master!"
Of course Black should continue to play on the queenside and center where he is strongest.
And, Pacifique I do not care if you laugh at me or say my reasoning is bull shit or whatever. And I do not care if you find a dozen games by masters who played 2. e5? I have played many games vs 2.e5 but since it is such a bad move--I did not save my games.
I can see Black thinking "I have the advantage in the center and the advantage on the queenside but White is slightly better on the kingside--so what should I do? Eureka! I think I will play h5 and make myself more vulnerable on my kingside! Then everyone will say that is a good move because---I am a master!"
Of course Black should continue to play on the queenside and center where he is strongest.
And, Pacifique I do not care if you laugh at me or say my reasoning is bull shit or whatever. And I do not care if you find a dozen games by masters who played 2. e5? I have played many games vs 2.e5 but since it is such a bad move--I did not save my games.
Are you unable to read what I have written? Or do you have a problem to understand what the word "particular" means? You are still unable to show how Black should play to prove that Black is better. Your abstract "blah blah blah" still has zero value without ability to back it up, showing how exactly Black should play.
Lol I do not think you showed how White should play either! There are zillons of variations. But, in general Black should play with q side or center moves.
If you think of the French Defense--this position is similar except Black has freed what is usually his bad bishop and black has a lead in development. So play similar to the French Defense and to not play moves like h5?
One way to improve your chess [and this is a way to improve that very few players use] is to have a very good understanding that the value of each bishop or knight can change with every move. In the game between the 2 masters given by Pacifique just look at White's 3rd move--it is as much of a bad move as 1. e5 Why? because in this kind of French like set up the white squared bishop is stronger than the black squared bishop and here White plays Bb5+ and if Black responds Bd7 White is in trouble. In the game Black played 3. ...Nc6 and allowed his pawns to be doubled which slowed down his game and gave White close to an equal game.
Of couse the way the two masters played shows the folly of just throwing out a master game and suggesting in necessarily means something.
Y do people play the Scandinavian at all? I agree the 2.e5 is a bad move, but the Scandinavian can easily be beaten by taking the pawn and when the Q recaptures just harrass the Q as you develop your pieces and white wins easily!
@frank124c
I play the Modern Scandinavian.
http://www.chess.com/opening/eco/B01_Scandinavian_Defense_Modern_Variation
Frank, there is more to the
Scandinavian then
White harrassing the black Queen for one move. If that was all there was to it then nobody would play that defense. I have won from some good players with that opening.
However, I admit on the surface it looks bad.
The Modern Scandinavian is quite a bit different than the QxP variation.
Of coursaWhite has many ways to try and convert his normal opening advantage into something more.
@ponz It`s you who made a claim about black having advantage, so you should be able to demonstrate how Black can reach it. Speaking on your line - the main idea of 3.Bb5+ is to exchange light squared bishops to prevent black from exchanging bishop vs knight (Bg4-Bxf3), as in closed positions (which are going to arise) knights seems to be more useful. So White takes on d7 of course with idea to play f4, Nf3, 0-0 etc. Here are example of possible play. I dont see more than equality. Feel free to correct this.
@Turm_Breuberg - I think ...d4, perhaps as soon as move 4, is the way to play against that system.