Created Opening
Sort:
This reminds me of a symmetrical English sideline. I have seen e4 c5 c4, but I have not seen that reply before. Not necessarily good, but it isn't as bad as some other created openings. Ex: Z00 Crackpot Gambit
i have reached this position as black against my friend (mainly because I don't know how to play the english) and it resulted in an interesting game, though he won.
2 c4 doesn't contribute to white's development, leaves white's d pawn backward, and creates a hole on d4; that seems like an unnecessarily high price to pay for seizing control of d5. black could do better than repeating white's mistake with 2 ... c5 -- 2...Nf6 followed by 3 ... c6 and 4 ... d5 (or even the immediate 2 ... c6 & 3 ... d5) looks stronger to me.
unferth wrote:
2 c4 doesn't contribute to white's development, leaves white's d pawn backward, and creates a hole on d4; that seems like an unnecessarily high price to pay for seizing control of d5. black could do better than repeating white's mistake with 2 ... c5 -- 2...Nf6 followed by 3 ... c6 and 4 ... d5 (or even the immediate 2 ... c6 & 3 ... d5) looks stronger to me.
2 c4 doesn't contribute to white's development, leaves white's d pawn backward, and creates a hole on d4; that seems like an unnecessarily high price to pay for seizing control of d5. black could do better than repeating white's mistake with 2 ... c5 -- 2...Nf6 followed by 3 ... c6 and 4 ... d5 (or even the immediate 2 ... c6 & 3 ... d5) looks stronger to me.
I absolutely agree, and for the same reason. 2.c4 is not a terrible move, but I just don't think it is worth it. I told my friend about this very problem with 2.c4 in response to the Sicilian (for some reason this is a rather common move amongst beginners). The move creates a strong hold on d5, but immediately cedes the d4 square. As white, you should be trying to fight for more than this. Remember, it is black that should be fighting for equality. As white, you should be trying to keep some advantage. Black will pretty much have already achieved equality by the end diagram above. Is the d5 square really worth all this? In some positions; sure. In the position following 1.e4 e5; surely not.
the 1st thing i would analyze as Black to refute would be 2...d6
sort of a phillador type move... anticipating a Nf3 happening because it's usually a good move. 2...d3 opens the line for the c8 bishop who i would like to exchange for the Nf3 knight. the primary goal being the ability to develop Nc6-Nd4 in some fashion to put the knight in a spot that can't get bumped by a pawn. also, one of the main weaknesses of playing 2...d6 is the ability of a Spanish game type bishop Bc5+
2...d6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4. i don't know what white plays here maybe d3 maybe Nc3 4... Bg4 5. something 5...Bxf3 6.Qxf3 Nd4
probably some major flaws in my logic but i don't have a board in front of me to experiment
or maybe.........
i'm not too familiar with the Italian game, but i wonder if there are any weaknesses of playing 2.c4 which looks like bishop opening game but without the power.
Just got bored so I decided to make up an opening. Please give your thoughts: