Developing a position that looks cool, good idea!?

Seraphimity

In the following diagram I had played black.  White developed both bishops in a two move step put them on d3,e3 with knigts to d2,e2.  I was left to wonder what was to defend the castle?  Pixie dust and magic faery?

Is white's position Valid.  I am a relative amatuer and have no engine and thought white's position looked rather formidable.  I'm curious if anyone finds white' position to be sound, or is this just a nice to look at symmetrical assembly.  

blueemu

Typically, positions with the Bishops developed symmetrically... e3 and d3, f4 and c4, g5 and b5... are not particularly solid. An exception is the double-fianchetto with Bishops at g2 and b2, which can be quite resiliant given a good central formation.

Seraphimity
blueemu wrote:

Typically, positions with the Bishops developed symmetrically... e3 and d3, f4 and c4, g5 and b5... are not particularly solid. An exception is the double-fianchetto with Bishops at g2 and b2, which can be quite resiliant given a good central formation.

Although I don't personally think double-fianchetto is a good formation I confess I struggle againts it in play.  The idea of commiting both the b and g pawn early and the extra step's to develop the bishop without a direct purpose doesn't do it for me.  

blueemu

There is a direct purpose... it gives you Bishop-control of e4, d4, e5 and d5. No other formation will offer that so early in the game.

Having said that... I don't often play the double-fianchetto either.

Idrinkyourhealth

white will drown into a pusy , but black will win the game. all depends of if you are omosexual or not. <º))))<<( .I.