Scandinavian "Declined" 2.e5

I challenged you. Show me your advantage.

Btw.: This no CK with black having one more move, as white will not play d4 easily, so c5 is not doing that much here.

I decline your challenge due mainly to health reasons but ty anyway.

@ponz

"In this position White is saddled with a "bad bishop" and thus almost all endgames he will be at a disadvantage."

The pawn structure is not deadly fixed yet so it`s too early to talk about "bad bishop". To say nothing on fact that White is not forced to enter into endgame.

"Black has more control of the center."

Really? Isn`t White pawn on e5?

 "If white moves a piece to c3 or e3 Black can at least consider d4 or delaying d4. Black has two possible lines of play.  expansionn on the queenside and/or play for the f3 break.  Or a combination of both."

Is it so dangerous for White? See lines given above. In fact d4 is what white need to take control e4.

"Looking at the position, Black already has a lead in development. "

Looking at the position Black has developed 2 minor pieces while White has developed one minor piece and castled. and development itself means nothing if you are unable to exploit it. Also the knight on g6 is out of game (see again lines given above).

it always depends on how the both sides will bring and execute every idea on the board. thus, playing scandinavian has a lot of strong lines and a bit sharp. sometimes over extending the developement of white may lead to serious trouble. *just my opinion guys =)

9. c4 dxc4  10. dxc4  0-0-0  11. Nc3  Qxd1 12. Rxd1  Rxd1

13. Nxd1 

Black has slightly better endgame in my opinion. 

I disagree strongly. The endgame is 100% equal. Dead draw even in Master level (except blitz/bullet/zeitnot etc.).

White is going to play Nf2, Be3, Rd1 etc.

You think it is 100% equal and I think

black has some advantage.

You may claim deadly drawish position as "better for Black", but your wishful thinking will not change anything.

What is the point of 3. b4?

You want to prove white is worse if he keeps playing bad moves?

3. f4, 3. Nf3, 3. b3, 3. Bb5+ and maybe some h3 stuff (prevent Bg4) are the way to play here. 3. d4 could be possible as well, but clearly loses a move.

3. b4 seems completely pointless in this position. Why would anyone play that? This is neither French-type (no e6 played) nor Siclian (good players will NEVER push e5 in Sicilian Wing-Gambit or Portsmouth-Gambit).

Would you beat those FMs, IMs and GMs that played 2. e5 in the past?

If you think you can beat me in this line, challenge me. 

Curious, have any gms played the White side of the 1. e4  d5  2. e5?

Shredder-DB finds 8 games with 2. e5. 

My Correspondence-DB finds 39 games with this move. 

Even Paul Keres played 2. e5 once.

So what? Even 1. g4 might be playable. (Still I would not advocate it.)
The fact that patzers play these moves, continue with crap and get clobbered doesn't make them bad, terrible or stupid. 

And 2. e5 in the Center Counter should be stronger than Grobs Attack.

My proposal stands. Challenge me with the Center Counter and I will play 2. e5. Then show me the refutation.

Seems like Black should be playing for the light square blockade on the Kside.  I would play ...h5 followed by getting a N on f5 and ..Be7.  Since (compared to the 2.f4 French with I have some experience with) White can't play Bd3xf5 this concept is especially strong.

This kind of a structure is not unplayable for White, but the exchange of the light-squared bishops involved clearly favors Black.  White will solve the usual French Advance problem of the QN being misplaced (it will go to c2 and support d4) but will have a very hard time getting control of f5 and as such the pawns will remain on dark squares making White's bishop bad.  Unless White is willing to avoid this type of structure by playing some wild move like c2-c4 at some point I think it's safe to conclude the continuation with Bb5xd7 and f4 is misguided.

I see the 2.e5 advance ALL THE TIME.  There's no second move I'd rather see. I wouldn't say it can outright be refuted, but it certainly gives black AT LEAST equality.  Gives me control of d4, a target on e5, an extra pawn in the center, and usually the pin on the f3 knight (because most who play e5 don't know what they are getting into and they think this knight will help them make the d4 break). 

Feel free to play this line against me as much as you want; I very rarely lose in it.
 

Alright, what's the point of this bishop exchange I've seen on a few of these at turn 4?  White's pawns are on the dark squares and black's are on the light squares, so isn't this trading white's good bishop for black's bad bishop?  I see this all of the time in the French, and it seems to usually go poorly for white in this case.  I have to agree with GreenCastleBlock.