Take my Queen, please...

Hello, Since playing on chess.com I've seen many lines, openings, combinations, etc.; some I've been able to follow, some I'm still trying to figure out.  But there is one move that I have seen only one time and would like your opinion on it.  That is the move where the d file becomes open and white captures black queen on d8, which forces black king to recapture.  This results in an even trade of queens; but this has been further explained to me as creating an advantage for white simply by removing black's ability to castle.

I'm still uncertain as to whether this strategy of preventing an oponent's castle is worth such an early game sacrifice.

Most of you who read this are rated much higher than my game, and as such, I appreciate your thoughts on this.

Sincerely,

Curt 

Yeah it gets threatened a lot, but I manage to avoid it most times. I'll let someone better comment on what a good idea it is, if indeed it is a good idea...

It isn't a sacrifice--it's an exchange.  It usually doesn't amount to much...but sometimes it can be useful (if the exchanger can make good use of the time thus gained).

In the great majority of practical positions if you're able to force your opponent to give up the right to castle it's advantageous to do so.

That said, the main reason this is true is because a king who cannot castle is more vulnerable to attack.  Also it can clog up your development, especially for the rooks, and so keep an opponent passive or again make him vulnerable to attacks.

In the particular instance where queens are traded early, these points can become moot and result in a nearly equal game.  With queens off the king is less vulnerable to attack and in the case I'll show below (an actual opening variation) the development remains unhindered.

The black king will often end up on c7 or even e7, the back rank is cleared for the rooks, and the king is not under attack.  The position is nearly equal.  In fact the advantage is so small white is better to pass up this idea and just keep developing.

With both queens off the board,castling loses some of it's importance.It then becomes a game with the player that is able to play w/o a queen better usually getting the better game.

Well, I disagree!

Look at this

Well, 5... Be6 is horrible.

5...f5

That's the fun of chess, white has to prove his development advantage is tangible :)  (The doubled pawn line is clearly wrong).

And, if you prepare for this opening as white, it may be a great weapon you can use (likely a black player will be ready if they allow this though).  So I agree white is a bit better, but not much different from just continuing to develop.

lol, it's good not to evaluate a position too mechanically... whenever someone says the evaluation is _____ I sometimes think, yeah well prove it or I don't believe you... you said the doubled pawns were terrible and I was wondering how white could attack them.

Yeah I agreed later, but that's that mechanical evaluation crap.

Be6 allowing the doubled pawns has actually been played by strong (enough) players :)

Yep. I would take black, and I would play either 5...f5, 5...Kd8, or 5...f6 and feel pretty safe

Hm...interesting.  But I still wouldn't be inclined to play it with Black, just because I don't see him getting a lot of play out of that position.

I imagine I would be more inclined to opt for 5... f6 6 Nc3 c6.  And as for not evaluating a position too mechanically...well, that in itself is rather mechanical.  Right? 

Hehe... the only thing we know is that we don't know anything?  Or some sort of conundrum like that 

Trading queens and taking away my opponent's ability to castle really helped me in a recent game.  If black had still been able to castle, I would have had to work a lot harder for checkmate:

N2UHC, you could have easily attacked faster without queen exchange!

Vyomo, why wouldn't black block the Qh5+ with pawn to g6?  That would block the attack while forcing the queen to move.

By the way everyone, thank you for taking your time to share your expertise here.  I appreciate it, very much.

Yours in Christ, Curt

Well In all of my games played, if i can get the queen exchange and they cant castle, i usually pull of a queen side castle after gaining momentum. It begins an attack on the king and gets him running to the center of the board in most cases. But in reality the choice is yours. If you play fine without your queen, do it. If not, then don't. Every one of these things comes down to preferences.

Thanks Benny_B.  That sounds like solid advice.  Usually when play without my queen it's due to a mistake that causes me to lose the piece.  At that point I am forced to play "better"(?) without queen.  However I am currently playing two games where this early queen exchange occured, resulting in black's being unable to castle.  One of the games I'm white; the other I'm black.  If nothing else, it throws another, unexpected line at me that I've been forced to deal with.  I'm hoping it improves my game.  Keep the advice coming, all!

Thanks again.

Hey, no problem. Just sharing what i have learned and personally experianced. If you have any other questions feel free to ask me, I will do my best to provide some insight. The queen exchange actually does stem off of certain book lines, so it is meant to happen sometimes. Also- Go checkout my forum post of Open Vs. Closed Games, trying to get a discussion started.

eek. why all these examples of a poorly played pirc? in the old indian defense black looks to exchange off queens early, lose castling rights, but with a far more solid position. in general queens add a lot of complexity to a game, so a weaker player might try to exchange off queens, where yes, the stronger player will likely grind them down anyway, but they are less likely to be mated quite as quickly with the queens off, and there's fewer opportunites for major mistakes ;)

so anyway..