I like the Scandinavian as black and have been looking for a weird but playable anti-Sicilian, so this looked, in principle, promising. Obviously theoretically unsound, but that's what they said about the Scandinavian! Do you think it's playable, or are there special problems arising from the fact that it's reversed and the e-pawn is still out there?
Smith-Morra Gambit, Scandinavian Style!
Sort:
This looks worse than a proper Scandinavian since white traded a center pawn for a wing pawn, and his queen is awkwardly placed in the face of black's typical Sicilian queenside expansion.
Wouter_Remmerswaal wrote:
You just gave away a center pawn for no compensation.
Yeah, but that's true of the Smith-Morra Gambit in general - a tried and true anti-Sicilian line.
Jan 14, 2011
0
#5
The_Insanity_Defence wrote:
Wouter_Remmerswaal wrote:
You just gave away a center pawn for no compensation.
Yeah, but that's true of the Smith-Morra Gambit in general - a tried and true anti-Sicilian line.
In the smith morra you also gain an extra minor piece that is developed. In your line you do not.
Thanks for taking a look at it Birds and Wouter, and especially for your in-depth look, Firepower. Those certainly aren't promising club statistics! 
Wouter, sorry I didn't get you at first; after Firepower's breakdown I see what you're saying now - it's not so much the tempo of development that's a potential problem (i.e., the same thing the Scandinavian player faces regularly) as it is the center-pawn-for-semi-center-pawn trade that precipitated it (vs. center-for-center in the Scandinavian). At the same time (and admittedly much in the face of those stats!) I'm intrigued by Birds' point that this con might be somewhat canceled out by the advantage in tempo for a white Scandinavian vis-a-vis the black Scandinavian who compounds his second-mover disadvantage with another loss in tempo.
I guess at the end of the day I'll just have to play it myself, and see how bad I get creamed!
Jan 14, 2011
0
#7
It's an okay idea, but the thing about the scandinavian is that the pawn usually wants to stay on e3. Perhaps 1.Nf3 c5 2.d4!? cxd4 3.Qxd4!? is a move order worth investigating.
Reti to Sicilian to Scandinavian, thanks llamalord, I like it! And it does leave options open with that e-pawn.
And, indeed, ajedrecito, to be clear I'm just using some shorthand here and not advocating nomenclature for a new oddball chess opening (in the spirit of chess databases calling all openings "Sicilian, Smith-Morra Gambit" after d4, regardless of whether the gambit occurs).
Qa4, i like it. playable. might experiment with it.
Fezzik wrote:
stay away from it as White and as Black
I have seen the topic of the Smith-Morra provoke people on both sides to claim the other side is unsound, but I have never before seen anything like this.
sorry for the misunderstanding
Fezzik wrote:
ghostofmaroczy wrote:
Fezzik wrote:
stay away from it as White and as Black
I have seen the topic of the Smith-Morra provoke people on both sides to claim the other side is unsound, but I have never before seen anything like this.
That's because you chose to cut off the quote. Read the whole comment.
A comma or two was missing:
"Stay away from it as White and, as Black, ..."
(Not that I agree with the advise)
My own experience with the Smith-Morra is pretty much the same as with the Grand Prix and Alapin's, which is that it works quite well against an opponent who booked up in the Sicilian but hasn't gotten to its refutations yet and otherwise is a struggle, albeit no greater a struggle than I typically have playing the Sicilian against a Sicilian player (hence my search for a relatively unseen anti-Sicilian line). Since I have no intention of becoming an exclusive QP player for white (can't give up the Ruy), I'll have to eventually man up and learn the old e5 c5 thoroughly. Until then, happy to experiment with anti-Sicilian gimmickry like what I posted 
