The best book is not a book, but a data base.
The difference is not that big: Qa5 or Qd6 or Qd8 or even Qe5+, black plays usually c6 and Qc7 anyway.
Scandinavian 3..Qd6 and 3..Qd8
Sort:
Its true I could miss some recent ideas by not studying the most current games but you can also miss ideas by only studying databases. There are ideas in books that havent been tried. Also, I often play training games with titled players and analyze with them afterwards. They usually fill me in on ideas that I havent seen in books. I dont see any reason to go through the games in the database when I have strong players doing it for me.....plus I suspect that some of the ideas they are sharing with me havent been played before.
Anyway....the two books Im leaning towards are (1) Scandinavian the dynamic 3..Qd6 by Michael Melts (2) 3...Qd8 Scandinavian: simple and strong. by Daniel Lowinger.
Mar 11, 2022
0
#5
unfortunately, i think the 3...qd6 line is borderline busted by the shirov idea of d4, nf3-ne5 ,f4 and in some lines g4! The problem is, white gets all this safe space and black doesnt even get the benefit of a safe place to put his light squared bishop.
1.)e4 d5 2.)exd5 Qxd5 3.)Nc6 Qd8 is pretty much a disadvantage for black,he is falling behind development.Qd6 is blunt.I preder Qa5
Mar 11, 2022
0
#7
At its best, the "Scandinavian" is lame. Against real amateurs or people too busy to study chess, it can throw them off their limited preparation. Once you hit someone who studies chess and has some decent skills, you'll only struggle.
#6, #7, #8
Carlsen played it regularly
https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1768345
#10
Carlsen has played both 3...Qd8 and 3...Qd6, so he is undecided if any of those is 'better' than the other.
4 d4 and 4 Nf3 are decent moves after 3...Qd8 as well as after 3...Qd6.
There is no reason to believe one is 'better' than the other.
Lowinger is rated 2049. Melts is unrated.
Thanks for the info......those appear to be FIDE ratings. if you look at USCF ratings, Lowingerr is 2251 while Melts is 2100. Melts's USCF rating is a provisional rating based on 14 games. I find it rather interesting that a player like Melts would be able to get a book published. Lowinger's qualifications sound more reasonable since he is a USCF life master. Just based on the above, I might be inclined to pass on both books or at least on Melts. I normally study books written by players who have titles of IM or higher.
jamesstack wrote:
Thanks for the info......those appear to be FIDE ratings. if you look at USCF ratings, Lowingerr is 2251 while Melts is 2100. Melts's USCF rating is a provisional rating based on 14 games. I find it rather interesting that a player like Melts would be able to get a book published. Lowinger's qualifications sound more reasonable since he is a USCF life master. Just based on the above, I might be inclined to pass on both books or at least on Melts. I normally study books written by players who have titles of IM or higher.
Oh just looked up Melts on ICCF and he is actually an IM on ICCF so his book may be worth buying.
#14
IM in ICCF is no big deal. GM in ICCF is trustworthy.
#13
"Carlsen has also played 2. Ke2" ++ But not in serious competition
Your "strong GMs don't play this move any more" is wrong.
"I just gave a reason to believe that Melts' will be the better one."
++ So your reason is that you spent 10 minutes with a subpar engine.
There's no reason to take your pronouncements seriously.
darkunorthodox88 wrote:
unfortunately, i think the 3...qd6 line is borderline busted by the shirov idea of d4, nf3-ne5 ,f4 and in some lines g4! The problem is, white gets all this safe space and black doesnt even get the benefit of a safe place to put his light squared bishop.
I have the book "An Idiot-Proof Chess Opening Repertoire" by Burgess. He says Black is okay afaik. Is this outdated?
tygxc wrote:
#6, #7, #8
Carlsen played it regularly
https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1768345
Carlsen is no parameter for anything.
When he plays that against a strong opponent in classical and win then it can be used as an argument...
darkunorthodox88 wrote:
unfortunately, i think the 3...qd6 line is borderline busted by the shirov idea of d4, nf3-ne5 ,f4 and in some lines g4! The problem is, white gets all this safe space and black doesnt even get the benefit of a safe place to put his light squared bishop.
I'm a fan of shirov and didn't know about that. What game was this?
Optimissed wrote:
jamesstack wrote:
Anyway....the two books Im leaning towards are (1) Scandinavian the dynamic 3..Qd6 by Michael Melts (2) 3...Qd8 Scandinavian: simple and strong. by Daniel Lowinger.
Against Qd8, spending ten minutes with the self-analysis tool available on chess.com has convinced me that no other 4th move than 4. d4 should be considered. d4 is more flexible than Nf3, for instance. It can't be a weakness because white is a full tempo ahead and effectively has two extra moves. In an otb long time control game, I would be confident of getting the better position against anyone, which will be why strong GMs don't play this move any more.
Have you read the intro to Lowinger's book? He makes the argument that Nc3 isnt really gaining a tempo because the knight isnt really ideally placed on c3. He says a pawn on c3 would be more ideal. He also points out that with the knight on c3, white has to move the knight in order to play the pawn to c4. I dont have the book yet but to me that is the critical question in this line.....is Nc3 a true gain in tempo....if it is then the line must be bad....if not then Qd8 is probably fine for black or at leasr no worse than the other two moves. Either way it could prove an interesting question to ponder. https://www.amazon.com/Qd8-Scandinavian-Simple-Strong/dp/1936490765/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1647261105&sr=8-2
I also read the intro to Melts book and he says Bronstein also used to play the Qd6 line.
Mar 14, 2022
0
#18
Optimissed wrote:
Morfizera wrote:
darkunorthodox88 wrote:
unfortunately, i think the 3...qd6 line is borderline busted by the shirov idea of d4, nf3-ne5 ,f4 and in some lines g4! The problem is, white gets all this safe space and black doesnt even get the benefit of a safe place to put his light squared bishop.
I'm a fan of shirov and didn't know about that. What game was this?
That's the whole point. A "borderline bust" isn't quite a refutation and black should know all the lines.
its a borderline bust because blacks position while miserable isnt quite a forced lost. Even at fairly high levels, white is one inaccuracy away from being a more reasonable eval like 0.6.
Qd8=passive (develop pieces normally)
Qd6=decent (play g3-Bf4; develop pieces normally)
That's all you need to know.
Does anyone know some good books on 3..Qd8 and 3..Qd6? from white's perspecive? I feel like I know what to do with 3..Qa5 and the various gambit lines. I dont see 3...Qd8 or 3..Qd6 very often but would like to be prepared for them anyway.