Why Nc3 instead of Nf6?
Sort:
I'm curious as to the basic strategy in the scotch game. If 1.e4 e5 -- why would you do Nc3 as opposed to Nf3? Isn't it essentially a potential tempo lost because black doesn't have to protect his attacked e5 pawn? Is it just to develop normally in a quieter manner?
I'm a fool... I meant Nf3 in the title.
Well, Nc3 is the Vienna Game, and can be played many ways. One idea is to go for a delayed sort of king's gambit with f4 on the next move as an attempt to improve the original gambit.
That's what I meant, Vienna Game. Been a long day :) Thanks for the reply. What is the main idea or common theme of it? I'm curious why it would be played over the attacking 2.Nf3
2. Nf3 attacks a pawn, but 2. ... Nc6 defends it no problem. On the other hand playing f4 is the start of a long term attacking plan. 2. f4 is really attacking. 2. Nc3 and 3. f4 is also very attacking and obviously 2. Nf3 and 3. f4 is not possible.
So the entire purpose of the Vienna game is to transpose into a kings gambit?
There's also a pretty interesting line that starts: 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Nxe4 (after 4.Nxe4 d5, Black wins the piece back) 4.Qh5. I forget the whole line, but it's called the Frankenstein-Dracula Variation and it's very cool in my opinion :) (google it if you need to). Pretty much, White creates one mating threat after another, while Black is forced to defend. Black ends up down the exchange, but with a development advantage and the possibility of trapping White's vulnerable Queen.
Tartakower: The strength of this move, paradoxically, is that it threatens nothing.
And what Paulgottlieb said, White wants to get in f4 before nf3.
JimSardonic wrote:
I'm curious as to the basic strategy in the scotch game. If 1.e4 e5 -- why would you do Nc3 as opposed to Nf3? Isn't it essentially a potential tempo lost because black doesn't have to protect his attacked e5 pawn? Is it just to develop normally in a quieter manner?
Because Nc3 does not block the f pawn.
