c6 seems interesting after exd5 though
Why Scandinavian sucks
Sort:
7 days ago
0
#6
It's not that hard to study. Queen takes pawn,white develops knight,attacks the queen,queen a5, then just develop
7 days ago
0
#8
The Scandinavian often gives me a lot of problems to crack. I will end up having a winning position but lost on time in Blitz.
I have learned a number of traps but my opponent never plays into the positions where I can execute them; but they likely are unfamiliar with my playing 3. Nf3 instead of the more common 3. Nc3.
If nothing else its much better than the same reversed.
Englund it was called, I think ?!?
7 days ago
0
#10
MariasWhiteKnight wrote:
If nothing else its much better than the same reversed.
Englund it was called, I think ?!?
Been trying to learn this one to throw off d4 opponents. If not familiar with, its strong, but if ready, its easily beaten.
6 days ago
0
#11
The-AgileFinancial wrote:
MariasWhiteKnight wrote:
If nothing else its much better than the same reversed.
Englund it was called, I think ?!?
Been trying to learn this one to throw off d4 opponents. If not familiar with, its strong, but if ready, its easily beaten.
As someone who's spent years as a 1.d4 player, the problem for people playing the Englund is most 1.d4 players intermediate or better will be completely booked up to play against it. There's several lines to refute it, and if white knows what they are doing, black is usually completely lost in the first ten moves. Maybe good for under 1000 blitz? But I guess this is off topic since OP wanted to discuss the Scandi.
What are your thoughts on the Modern Scandi line where instead of Qxd5, black plays Nf6?
6 days ago
0
#16
HeckinSprout wrote:
The-AgileFinancial wrote:
MariasWhiteKnight wrote:
If nothing else its much better than the same reversed.
Englund it was called, I think ?!?
Been trying to learn this one to throw off d4 opponents. If not familiar with, its strong, but if ready, its easily beaten.
As someone who's spent years as a 1.d4 player, the problem for people playing the Englund is most 1.d4 players intermediate or better will be completely booked up to play against it. There's several lines to refute it, and if white knows what they are doing, black is usually completely lost in the first ten moves. Maybe good for under 1000 blitz? But I guess this is off topic since OP wanted to discuss the Scandi.
What are your thoughts on the Modern Scandi line where instead of Qxd5, black plays Nf6?
I ignore it and play the same 3. Nf3 as Qxd5 basically; very similar opening principles either way.
6 days ago
0
#17
HeckinSprout wrote:
The-AgileFinancial wrote:
MariasWhiteKnight wrote:
If nothing else its much better than the same reversed.
Englund it was called, I think ?!?
Been trying to learn this one to throw off d4 opponents. If not familiar with, its strong, but if ready, its easily beaten.
As someone who's spent years as a 1.d4 player, the problem for people playing the Englund is most 1.d4 players intermediate or better will be completely booked up to play against it. There's several lines to refute it, and if white knows what they are doing, black is usually completely lost in the first ten moves. Maybe good for under 1000 blitz? But I guess this is off topic since OP wanted to discuss the Scandi.
What are your thoughts on the Modern Scandi line where instead of Qxd5, black plays Nf6?
And you were pretty dead on about Englund Gambit. I was up 4-0 in a tourney and instead of my normal response vs d4, I tried it. It actually was a close game till I blundered late; but nothing felt natural or intuitive.
People may disagree but the Scandinavian Defense actually is BUNS BUNS BUNS!
First of all, the chess saying that says: "Never move your queen out early" applies to this because many 1000- 1700 bots do Qxd5 which leads to Nc3 which can lead to early checkmate for white like when I did a match against Jade which led me to an about 20-30 move checkmate
Second, the Nc3 leads to a tempo loss which then the queen has to move again. (e.g) Qa4
Third, I'm pretty sure the Scandinavian is not good (why do people say it's good?) because there is a way higher chance for white to win.
Finally, Scandinavian is hard to study because... idk why
Change my mind