don't move your queen within the first 3 moves
12 Sep '12 17:21HI tim88
Without any posted examples then it is hard to explain.
It may be opening theory off the top of my head I can think of
two other examples (not including 2.Qe2 in the French.) - see below.
Hi RJ.
2.Qe2 in the French.
Is designed to prevent Black from playing 2...d5 so Black does not capture
back with the Queen. You appear not to know that 2.Qe2 is often the opening
prelude to and very often transposes into a version of the KIA (King's Indian Attack.)
Most French players will not play 2...d5 against 2.Qe2.
2.Qe2 has it's followers. I have it on MegaBase being played just over 4,500 times.
I even played it once OTB (draw).
But I think 2 d4 or even 2.Nf3 are better choices.
After 2.QE2 2....d5 has been played just over 200+ times. Big plus White.
I would play 2...d5 but not (again as you suggested after 3.exd5) capture back
with the Queen, but play 2...Nf6 and turn it into a gambit.
1.e4 e6 2.Qe2 d5 3.exd5 Nf6 4.dxe6 Bxe6.
White can have the b7 pawn (after Qb5+) I'm sure I can drum up some fun with that.
And if they don't take the b-pawn, then I'll be a pawn down.
And the bright side is.......?
I bet I have more experience than him playing a pawn down after three moves
than he has playing a pawn up after three moves. 🙂
And this needs cleaning up:
"But I would agree that if you move your queen out within the first 3 moves
that you have missed a better move..."
Forget 2.Qe2 in the French whose fundemental idea you seemed to have missed.
How about....
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 (the Centre Counter or Scandinavian Defence)
and....
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 (The Greco Counter or Latvian Gambit)
Both main line openings.
I thought you might perhaps have added these two as exceptions.
"I use the full point system of material evaluation that is recommended
by the majority of masters."
I would like to see an example of this.
Where a player tells you to evaluate the position by counting the points.
Rook = 5, Bishop =3 etc.
Infact I'll need a few, you said it was the majority of masters.
"A chess engine is programmed by a human, who does not always program
the computer to make the best move." 😕
Without any posted examples then it is hard to explain.
It may be opening theory off the top of my head I can think of
two other examples (not including 2.Qe2 in the French.) - see below.
Hi RJ.
2.Qe2 in the French.
Is designed to prevent Black from playing 2...d5 so Black does not capture
back with the Queen. You appear not to know that 2.Qe2 is often the opening
prelude to and very often transposes into a version of the KIA (King's Indian Attack.)
Most French players will not play 2...d5 against 2.Qe2.
2.Qe2 has it's followers. I have it on MegaBase being played just over 4,500 times.
I even played it once OTB (draw).
But I think 2 d4 or even 2.Nf3 are better choices.
After 2.QE2 2....d5 has been played just over 200+ times. Big plus White.
I would play 2...d5 but not (again as you suggested after 3.exd5) capture back
with the Queen, but play 2...Nf6 and turn it into a gambit.
1.e4 e6 2.Qe2 d5 3.exd5 Nf6 4.dxe6 Bxe6.
White can have the b7 pawn (after Qb5+) I'm sure I can drum up some fun with that.
And if they don't take the b-pawn, then I'll be a pawn down.
And the bright side is.......?
I bet I have more experience than him playing a pawn down after three moves
than he has playing a pawn up after three moves. 🙂
And this needs cleaning up:
"But I would agree that if you move your queen out within the first 3 moves
that you have missed a better move..."
Forget 2.Qe2 in the French whose fundemental idea you seemed to have missed.
How about....
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 (the Centre Counter or Scandinavian Defence)
and....
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 (The Greco Counter or Latvian Gambit)
Both main line openings.
I thought you might perhaps have added these two as exceptions.
"I use the full point system of material evaluation that is recommended
by the majority of masters."
I would like to see an example of this.
Where a player tells you to evaluate the position by counting the points.
Rook = 5, Bishop =3 etc.
Infact I'll need a few, you said it was the majority of masters.
"A chess engine is programmed by a human, who does not always program
the computer to make the best move." 😕
Back to Top