Moving a Pawn Twice in the Opening
Sort:
@Ponz111 (after 3. Qe2) "now we are out of book. There is a reason this is not a book move. It moves the queen in the opening and generally that is not something you want to do. Note for one thing the queen is vulnerable to Black playing Nc6 and Nd4. At this point Black has a slight advantage"
It is off subject but I would love to see what GM Gawain Jones says about 3. Qe2 in that series of moves.
I have read a book by Jones and do not ever remember his approving of that move in that sequence.
Apr 20, 2015
0
#24
| 3.Nd2 | 4,331 |
|
|||
| 3.Qe2 | 855 |
|
|||
| 3.Nc3 | 43 |
|
|||
| 3.Nf3 | 9 |
|
|||
| 3.Bd2 | 4 |
|
|||
| 3.Be2 | 3 |
|
|||
| 3.c3 | 3 |
|
|||
| 3.e5 | 3 |
|
|||
| 3.f4 | 3 |
|
|||
| 3.exd5 | 2 |
|
|||
| 3.g3 | 2 |
|
Here we see 3.Qe2 is the second most popular move in this position, with a hefty win ratio for white.
A whole lot depends on whose games were in the data base and how large is the data base? Without knowing these things a data base is not worth much.
Data bases often give bad moves as popular.
So, please answer the two questions?
data bases can be worse than useless, depending on what is the quality of the games in the data bases.
I will grant that 3. Qe2 can be considered a "book move" as it is in some data base with good results.
However it is still not such a good move. It is not a horrible move, just that 3. Nd2 is a little better.
Now that I said 3. Qe2 can be considered a book move can we get back to the theme of moving a pawn twice in the opening is often a bad move?
Usually you will not see moving a pawn twice without good reason in any legit opening. In the 3 openings mentioned, the openings were bad precisely because a pawn was moved twice in the opening without good enough reason.
For most players under 1800 they will often move a pawn twice in the opening without good reason. And they will not even know they are making a mistake.
Apr 20, 2015
0
#28
Was Chess.com's own games explorer.
Shows 855 games after 3.Qe2. So still "book" good or bad.
And white maintains the 45% win ratio, even several moves afterward. So doesn't appear to be one of those old lines, which was refuted recently.
But I am terrible at deciphering opening databases. So am willing to defer to your judgement.
whose games are in chess.com's game explorer?
Apr 20, 2015
0
#30
ponz111 wrote:
whose games are in chess.com's game explorer?
I had it set to "display master games"
I only got membership maybe a week ago, however. Afraid I don't know too much about it, yet.
Apr 20, 2015
0
#32
ponz111, very instructive post but I disagree with your 3rd diagram. It's totally fine for white to play d5.
Edit: I didn't read you posts inside the diagrams. I withdraw my comment.
VibrantMoves wrote:
ponz111, very instructive post but I disagree with your 3rd diagram. It's totally fine for white to play d5.
In my 3rd diagram I said it was quite ok to play d5.
My mistake :)
ponz111 wrote:
data bases can be worse than useless, depending on what is the quality of the games in the data bases.
I will grant that 3. Qe2 can be considered a "book move" as it is in some data base with good results.
agreed quality and even then checking for the quality of the games and the moves is still important. sometimes GMS will play certain openings and moves for events where a result is important (or unimportant)
However it is still not such a good move. It is not a horrible move, just that 3. Nd2 is a little better.
Now that I said 3. Qe2 can be considered a book move can we get back to the theme of moving a pawn twice in the opening is often a bad move?
Usually you will not see moving a pawn twice without good reason in any legit opening. In the 3 openings mentioned, the openings were bad precisely because a pawn was moved twice in the opening without good enough reason.
I think this is where you and others are in disagreement. The that you have too many exceptions to the conditions you purpose as your thesis statement. A better way of doing this is moving a pawn in the opening should always be with care. Pushing a pawn past the center in the opening must be done with care.
compare and contrast the specific cases where it is a good or bad move would make for something interesting to discuss. Again it comes down to concrete moves and long term cost benefits of the moves.
For most players under 1800 they will often move a pawn twice in the opening without good reason. And they will not even know they are making a mistake.
As someone who coaches a lot of kids (and been successful at it) I would say that the good part about pushing a pawn is that it can create a simple threat and gain space for the player doing so BUT this comes with a cost in becoming a target and the inflexibility of the pawn being advanced. If the pawn position cannot be consolidated, the attack on a piece be taken advantage the early gains can result in defense of the pawn and loss of the initiative or early positional gains.
Things boil down to what is concrete and practical. Openings that are impractical at the beginner and class level can be very impractical at the GM level.
Learning the situations where a pawn advance can be advantageous or be punished a reckless move is a great learning experience. You are right that beginners do this too often but they should be shown clear examples and not a situation where the player makes a dubious move then a blunder as seen in yoru examples. Often the reckless pawn move is just dubious and results in equal chances sfor both sides (if white does it) black has less leeway for error so can often be punished tactially.
Also your definition of iearly in opening is fairly broad. The opening is not generally considered over until the rooks are connected and this can sometimes not happen until after move 10-15 in many openings.
Mozekgames
I am not saying beginners do this often, I am saying players under 1800 often move a pawn twice in the opening when they should not. A player rated 1700 is not a beginner.
Yes, the opening is often 10-15 moves as you suggest. However you are wrong to say the opening is not generally considered over until the rooks are connected.
You keep implying or saying that I said players should not move a pawn twice in the opening. I am not saying this at all. I am saying players should not move a pawn twice in the opening without a very good reason.
I gave no example of a player making a dubious move and then a blunder.
I gave an example of one player making a dubious move and turning his advantage with the White pieces in the opening down to zero and then HIS OPPONENT moving a pawn twice in the opening and then the player with White now having the advantage.
please stop mischaracterizing what I say and please stop misquoting me.
There are always exceptions to any chess rule but the way I phrase the idea takes into account the exceptions.
It would be very nice if some strong player would list the general conditions where a pawn should not be moved twice in the opening and also the general conditions when a player can move a pawn twice in the opening.
I know there is such a listing somewhere as I have seen it.
Why can't you move a pawn twice in the beginning?
Jion_Wansu wrote:
Why can't you move a pawn twice in the beginning?
Often the reason is that it becomes overextended and subject to attack as in my first two examples.
However there are examples where you can move a pawn twice in the opening. Here is one example