When do you "double step" a pawn?

Not only was it a double step, like you're asking about, it was a theoretically meaningful one (unlike the contrived example in your OP) and not only did I explain the idea behind it for that specific position, but I generalized it in a way you can use to understand similar cases that don't even involve pawns. For example something like Bb7 followed a few moves later by Ba6.

But fine, I mean, I see you had trouble understanding that Bd6 supported e5, I guess my post was too much for you.

And you know it really pisses me off too, if you can't tell, because these forums are so full of $hit that when I see a topic like this I get excited. I get my hopes up we can talk about chess. But no, you spit my on hopes lol.

So fine, my mistake for thinking it could be something better.

"Not only was it a double step, like you're asking about, it was a theoretically meaningful one (unlike the contrived example in your OP) and not only did I explain the idea behind it for that specific position, but I generalized it in a way you can use to understand similar cases that don't even involve pawns."

You seem to suffer from the same ailment the French/Caro Kann theoretician is struggling with. With him, we can just sing "Beat it....just beat it". But in your case, I am not sure what to sing. Are you a cute little heartbreaker? Regardless, I don't think I want to take you home (no offense). Wow, his guitar playing was really good. I didn't realize the lyrics lacked so much. Anyways, back to the thread.

The position in the OP was not an example. It was meant to be a specific position, which is why I posted the FEN. Also, I highlighted e5 in three different positions. Maybe I need to place an ad in one of those highway banners. 

"And you know it really pisses me off too, if you can't tell, because these forums are so full of $hit that when I see a topic like this I get excited. I get my hopes up we can talk about chess. But no, you spit my on hopes lol."

You can still talk about chess. Talking about e6 and then e5 doesn't mean you are talking about zucchini and yellow squash. I think we can still put that under the category of chess, can't we?

"So fine, my mistake for thinking it could be something better."

Well, I am sorry to inform you that people aren't always looking to have someone make things "better". When they ask for A, they actually want A and nothing else. They don't want A + BETTER. They just want A, what they asked for originally. 

The title (and beginning of the first post) say you were asking in general, not just for the specific position. I guess you're trying to defend your BS reaction, but too bad for you, I deleted my helpful posts.

And even so, the specific position was already answered with post #10, and you even thanked the guy for it, so I was just continuing the discussion. Even if you're not interested in learning about chess, posts like that are helpful to others who read your topic and are wondering about such things.

And I didn't mean better as in I'm answering more than you asked, I meant better as in talking about chess vs crap like this https://www.chess.com/forum/view/off-topic/king-of-the-ladder which gets the majority of traffic on this forum. Although yes, you're right, I answered much more thoroughly than others.

I mean, I'm being a jerk too, but **** it, it's hard to give two ****s when I can talk about chess other places than chess.com with people who are actually interested.

"The title (and beginning of the first post) say you were asking in general, not just for the specific position."

So, if someone posts "Sitting at a Restaurant", and then they explain they are going to Japan for vacation you see nothing wrong with telling them how to sit at an Arab restaurant? You don't see the difference? After all, the title only said "sitting at a restaurant" right?

If you are going to post about any kind of sitting, you might as well sit like this.

Yeah, who'd have imagined there are some people on these forums older than 8 years old who not only post in complete sentences, but multiple sentences at once!

It's really amazing.

"It makes me sick"

I am starting to catch the flu from people not answering my question. I hope it doesn't turn into Coronavirus.

No, but when someone posts this

I'm going to post an opening where you move a pawn to d3 on move 4, and then to d4 on move 6.

You seem to share this guy's viewpoint.

Apparently you have never learned what an "abstract" is which follows up with a specific issue.

Except without the pretense because I'm literally cursing and saying I'm pissed.

Your recent posts seem like pretty halfhearted attempts at avoiding the fact that my posts were on topic and you didn't realize it.

Yeah, again, just doesn't seem your heart's in it.

"It was an abstract"

Sure, sure.

No, it's more of the fact that no one else besides punter99 has directly replied to my post. So, at 5:05am EST with no sleep so far, I am not going to take replies seriously unless someone actually discusses why e6 goes to e5. If punter99 explained it 100% then I will be posting further questions. However, I will give this thread some more time in case someone else or even punter99 himself feels like sharing more wisdom relating to my question. 

Yeah, and again, attempting to provoke me or... something? The effort is just sort of meh.

Yeah, feels like a troll who isn't even trying very hard.

You are a 7 minute vagabond who can't address the OP.

Anyways, I am off to sleep. It's Father's day and my father will be very upset when he sees what you have done to this thread. 

NO, MY WORDS DID NOT IMPLY IT!  LEARN TO READ!

I QUOTE:   "A better example is in the Caro-Kann Defense, and the reason is self explanatory, and the key difference between the Caro-Kann and the French."

Where the bleep do you get that I thought your game was a French or Caro-Kann out of "A BETTER EXAMPLE IS"?

The answer is you don't.  The answer is either you are too lazy to read, or you like to put words in people's mouth.  Which is it?

NEXT, HIGHLIGHTED IN BLUE, RE-READ YOUR ORIGINAL POST!!!   YOU DO NOT SAY ANYTHING SPECIFIC TO THE GAME.  THE FIRST SENTENCE YOU TALK ABOUT IS A CONCEPT!  THE CONCEPT OF MOVING THE SAME PAWN TWICE A SINGLE SQUARE EACH TIME EARLY ON IN THE GAME!  IF YOU WANT ONLY AN ANSWER SPECIFIC TO THE GAME, THEN YOU SHOULD BE ASKING SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THAT GAME, NOT THE CONCEPT AS A WHOLE!

AS FAR AS READING THE POST AS YOU INTENDED IT - WHY DON'T YOU TRY LEARNING TO RE-READ WHAT YOU POST AND PRETEND YOU ARE AN OUTSIDER - HOW WOULD THEY INTERPRET IT?  IF YOU READ POST 5 AS WELL, CLEARLY I AM NOT THE ONLY ONE THAT READ IT AS A CONCEPT WITH EXAMPLE AND NOT A QUESTION ABOUT A SPECIFIC POSITION.  MAYBE LEARN TO PROOFREAD AND MAKE SURE THAT YOUR QUESTIONS READ AS INTENDED!!!  YOU WANT ADVICE ON A SPECIFIC POSITION, SPECIFY THAT!

If you want answers on the specific position, you should never have put the first paragraph in the first post in there, and started with the second paragraph with maybe a couple of words late in the paragraph asking if the concept had a name or something.  Then it would be clear that you are asking specific to that position.

You put the concept before the position, you are getting answers to the concept.

You put the position before the concept, you are getting answers to the position.

ENGLISH 101!

YOU CANNOT TELL ME THAT THE FOLLOWING TWO STATEMENTS READ THE SAME THING!  (And this has NOTHING to do with your position in post 1 and all to do with your English in post 1):

Example A:  In the French McCutchen Main line, why should White recapture on move 7 with the b-pawn, creating doubled pawns, when he can take with the Bishop, maintaining a healthy pawn chain?  I thought doubled pawns were bad?

Example B:  Can someone explain to me why anybody would want doubled pawns when it can be avoided?  Why wouldn't you go out of the way to avoid doubled pawns?  Like look at the French McCutchen.  Everyone takes on c3 with the pawn instead of the Bishop!

You word it like example A, and you are getting answers on the French McCutchen.

You word it like example B, you are getting answers on doubled pawns with people interpreting your "EXAMPLE" as just that, an example to illustrate what you are asking IN GENERAL!

"The guy just wanted to get some help with the game and you start putting all the $hit in the world to this forum"

Thank you Tharuka123456 for your faithful support in the matter.

"NO, MY WORDS DID NOT IMPLY IT!  LEARN TO READ!"

Can you suggest a course, perhaps "SHOUTING MAKES WHAT YOU SAY MORE VALID!!!"? I haven't registered for that one yet.

"I QUOTE:   "A better example is in the Caro-Kann Defense, and the reason is self explanatory, and the key difference between the Caro-Kann and the French.""

You don't need to quote yourself. And you are on that French Caro Kann kick again. I was never asking about these two openings. You are on Day 2 of this current stint.

"Where the bleep do you get that I thought your game was a French or Caro-Kann out of "A BETTER EXAMPLE IS"?"

Where the bleep do you get that I thought my game was an example? It was THE game, not AN example. Maybe you need to learn to read and understand articles. You can sign up for my course now. 

"YOU DO NOT SAY ANYTHING SPECIFIC TO THE GAME."

Yea, I guess if you ignore the game and the move e5, I didn't. If construction workers put out a sign that says "DETOUR", I guess you don't take the detour. You just drive on through with your agenda.

"IF YOU WANT ONLY AN ANSWER SPECIFIC TO THE GAME, THEN YOU SHOULD BE ASKING SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THAT GAME, NOT THE CONCEPT AS A WHOLE!"

Sorry, next time I will post the game and highlight the move three times in the annotation that I want people to address in the future. You have now set me down the right path. I am so grateful for your patience and advice. The OP has been corrected to reflect ThrillerFan's wise words.

"CLEARLY I AM NOT THE ONLY ONE THAT READ IT AS A CONCEPT WITH EXAMPLE"

You are also clearly not the only one to continue to force your reading instead of addressing e5 now that YOU have re-read the OP post and see no evidence of me claiming the game and moves were an example. Where did I state it was an example? You and others introduced that assumption and now you are hellbent on defending it rather than saying, "Oh, I thought it was an example. In your game, I would have ______ because _______."

Usually that is how people reply when they misread the intention of a post. It doesn't mean I wasn't vague in my OP(title?), but it doesn't mean we replace it with your Caro Kann/French diatribe either.

I still have the same question regardless if I used the word "example" or not. I still have the same question regardless of the fact the title does not state e6 to e5. You actually have to read the OP and understand the context of THE game I was referring to.

"If you want answers on the specific position, you should never have put the first paragraph in the first post in there"

Ok, please tell chess.com this rule so they can ban any user that types paragraphs. This will help remove those "paragraph intruders".

"and started with the second paragraph with maybe a couple of words late in the paragraph asking if the concept had a name or something."

OMG, I started a second paragraph. How will you forgive me? And then I asked a name for it? Sometimes I get carried away and also get greedy.

"YOU WANT ADVICE ON A SPECIFIC POSITION, SPECIFY THAT!"

Sorry, as stated before, next time I will post the game and highlight the move three times in the annotation that I want people to address in the future. 

"You put the concept before the position, you are getting answers to the concept. You put the position before the concept, you are getting answers to the position."

This has been enlightening, I have learned a lot from your scolding. Thank you.

I posted a game with examples of e5. I asked why e6 to e5 in the game. That has always been a constant. Either reply to that or I will block you from this thread.