Don't move the Queen too early.

What do you think about people that plays early and aggressively with the queen, making a massacre without any strategy but trolling? For me is very difficult to focus on tactics and strategy while I'm defending myself of this disturbing queen... And so, I lose many games. Any advice about it?

Attack the queen relentlessly when it comes out too early while also developing at the same time. The opponent will lose many moves in the opening moving his queen around, and ultimately will lose the game because of that.

always go for the pawns first guys

Don't underestimate how powerful and tricky early queen moves can be. Grandmasters have lost to 1e4 e5 2 Qh4 !?, because they are unfamiliar with the theory.

true

2. Qh4 is an impossible move.

If you meant 2. Qh5, that's legal and really bad. But that doesn't mean white can't win. If white is a better player, I bet on white.

A speedy checkmate is a very satisfying way to punish someone who brings out their queen prematurely because it's a win for me but it 'should' also serve as a valuable reminder to the perils of going against established opening principles. When an opponent brings out their queen without any attacking/defending purpose it's a red flag that they are a beginner and the only way for them to learn is by realising that flexing the queen in the opening moves isn't going to intimidate someone who knows the limitations of the major pieces at such an early stage of a game. I delay bringing my queen out to avoid it getting in to trouble and losing tempo but also to work more with the other pieces and become stronger with combining bishop, knight and rook tactics to establish a winning position before the queen needs to get involved in the melee.

No grandmasters have lost to that in real tournaments. The only record of that is when alireza lost to scholars mate in 10s hyperbullet

I find when people get the queen out early, they're forced to move the queen a bunch of times, by pieces that I'm getting developed. The queen is the second most valuable piece behind the king, but you have to remember that makes it the second most vulnerable attacking piece. In most situations, it can only take any pawn or any piece if it can't be recaptured, so it's actually hard in the early game for the queen to create legitimate threats if the other player is playing solid. A Queen threatening a knight that's protected by a pawn is an empty threat.

On the other hand, as weak as a pawn is, it's very easy for it to create threats, because you can take, say, a protected knight no problem since knight for pawn is a great deal.

I guess this is part of the principle behind getting minor pieces out early. They're more likely to be able to create legitimate threats early on.

Since you probably define a "real tournament" as one in which no-one has played the wayward queen, I don't think that you point has any merit at all. Also "recorded games" represent only a tiny fraction of high ranking games anyway.

For example, I have a friend who is a retired IM. Only one of his games can be found on an active internet database. That game was at Hastings against Judit Polgar. There is no way that you are going to convince me that Hastings International Chess Congress does not qualify as a "real tournament" or that an IM hasn't played in other "real tournaments.

What is black suppose to do here?

There are exceptions but moving the queen before minor pieces are in place to act as backup isn't going to create opportunities for tactics.

What about in the Scandinavian?

Maybe this is a good opportunity for someone to explain it to me, because I really don't think I understand the idea behind the Scandinavian. Way I see it, pawn takes pawn, queen recaptures, knight threatens, maybe at best Queen goes to a5 and creates some kind of knight pin threat, but that looks like a great way to get trapped eventually and they could have achieved that pin more safely with a bishop, if they'd just developed their minor pieces. White will likely have 2 minor pieces developed before black has 1. None of that seems super scary to White, but if someone plays this opening a lot and wouldn't mind explaining what the fuss is about, I would genuinely like to know why it works for you.

What am I your coach? You're being pedantic and I don't have time for pedantic.

There’s this guy name John Bartholomew and I think Anand played the Scandinavian well; they did alright.

Theres very little theory for beginners to learn.

If you move your queen early you will lose your queen. Even if you are trying to aim at f2/f7 unless it is the Scandinavian because in that opening you move your queen to safety