Someone posted a question about this move. Can't retrace him/her
so fast. Therefore 'new' post on this.
I checked my database. It's a move very seldom played. My database
of 319.900 games contains only 8 games with this move. It's C30
ECO-code. Results: 5 wins for White, 2 for Black and 1 draw. In 5
games White played 3.Nf3, 3 games 3.Nc3. The latter being a draw in
the game Spassky-B. David French Ch, who played 3.Nc3.
Don't know if this is any help for you. Bye.
PS: I have a CD-ROM from ChessBase on the King's Gambit (have still
to study it). I'll have a look there as to whether there is more
information on this obvious sideline.
On the ChessBase CD-ROM by Alexander Bangiev, he says the
following...
"The well-known Nordwalder Variation. It became popular by Stafan
Bücker's book in which he analysed this in his opinion safe defence
against the King's Gambit. Indeed, the move 2.-/Qf6 is positionally
well-based: Black overprotects the point e5, attacking the Pawn f4.
Behind this there is a simple idea: he wants to take f4 with the Queen
and keep his solidly covered pawn e5. There are several continuations
for White, among others: 3.Nf3, 3.Nc3, 3.d4, 3.d3 and 3.Bc4.
How are they to be assessed, and which plan is best regarding the
attack on e5? 3.d4 is in my opinion (Bangiev's!) a positional mistake.
In such positions d4 should be played only after the pawns e5 and f4
have been exchanged (exf4), as otherwise Black can take d4 with his
pawnn forcing the first player to change his plans again. On the other
hand, play assumes such a tactically sharp character (White gets a
huge lead in development) that it's very tempting for any gambit
player to go for such a variation. 3.Bc4 in this position means a loss of
time, as it does nothing for the attack on e5. In the diagrammed
position (2.-/Qf6) I see only two continuations for White, which are
logical regarding the attack on the point e5: 3.Nc3 threatening Nc3-d5,
or: 3.Nf3 with the idea 4.fxe5." So far Bangiev.
If you're interested, contact chessbase.com. Cost will be
approximately $ 22.50. Hope you are helped a little bit. Bye.
It's not me referring to that book. It is the author of the ChessBase
Training Course CD-ROM, Alexander Bangiev.
I tried to look it up in a 1986 German publication 'Das abgelehnte
Königsgambit'. No trace there of 2.-/Qf6. But then, even in the ECO,
you often don't find what's been played. The same in MCO (Nick de
Firmian). You can't trust them all the time, these books & CDs. Try the
MCO & look for the Scandianavian Defence. All's fine as long as your
opponent plays the line. But if he/she doesn't you're very often at a
loss. I've got a book on the Scandianavian by John Emms. He only
treats the line: 1.e4/d5 - 2.e4xd5 (followed by either 2.Qxd5 or 2.Nf6.
But as an inexperienced player as myself, what move to make when
White plays 2.e5? No answer in the book! The same with the Alekhine
Defence, and very likely with many other 'theory'. Fortunately I find a
lot in my database. Cheerio!
Greetings:
d4...hmm, what can you say!!?? most pleyers have been brought up
on it; as soon as they see it, the shit bricks!! Take my advice...learn
both!! Plus all the other humdrum openings!!
If you look, there is a lot of "d4" gambits there also. the world does
not revolve around "e4".
Slan...
Imp..