Originally posted by robbie carrobieI don't remember ever playing 2 c4 against the French Defense, but I have played 3 c4 against it: 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 c4!?? de 4 Nc3. A fun little gambit that ain't too bad in blitz.
while searching for anti french defense i came across this interesting idea, i wonder if anyone has played 2.c4, the author claims to have won many games against masters at blitz.
[pgn]1.e4 e6 2.c4 d5 3.cxd5 exd5 4.Qb3 dxe4 5.Bc4 Qf6 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.Nge2 Bd6 8.d3 exd3 9.Nf4 Bxf4 10.Bxf4 d2+ 11.Kxd2 Nc6 12.Nd5 Kd8 13.Nxc7 Nf6 14.Rad1 Bg4 15.Qxb7 Rb8 16.Kc1 Bxd1 17.Rxd1 Ke7 18.Nd5 Kf8 19.Bd6 Kg8 20.Ne7 1-0[/pgn]
Originally posted by Wulebgrdid not Fischer himself take off beat lines, as in the poisoned pawn variation of the Sicilian and develop new ideas? yes there is good reason why 2.d4 is the 'main line', but there are also alternatives, are there not? the annals of chess history are filled with those who have taken a fresh look at some variation and sparked new life into it. we can think of Kasparov with the Scotch opening for example, the idea being that it is important to get ones opponent out of his knowledge base and experience and memory of a particular line and get him to play chess, as was demonstrated by Anand against Kramnik in the relatively recent world championship match. yes fundamental principles are important, but so is originality, who is to say which approach is better?
I've faced 2.c4 online a few times. I seem to recall that I give White an isolated d-pawn and win the endgame.
There's a good reason that 2.d4 is the main line: nothing else makes sense against a prepared opponent.
My advice to all those that keep exploring obscure offbeat lines against the French, the Sicilian, or whatever: stop wasting your time. Le such wins and you may never get over 1600 (or 2000, depending on your innate capabilities).
Originally posted by TheGambitpretty awesome videos, although the opening itself seems best reserved for blitz or over the board play, as it loses some of its appeal in correspondence. really like the honesty of the author, thanks for posting, regards Robbie.
Robbie, check out these videos, he runs through quite a few different lines for 2.c4....
Originally posted by schakuhrseems to me after 4...Nc6 that d3 would be interesting, with the idea of a king side fienchetto and an f4 push....though maybe not in that order
here's what one of the local chess club members played in a league match:
[pgn] 1. e4 e6 2. c4 d5 3. Nc3 d4 4. Nce2 Nc6 5. Nf3 d3 6. Nc3 Nb4[/pgn]
He lost the rook on a1, never saw it back again, lost after 40 more moves or so, we lost the match and relegated
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYes, if someone's going to spend time researching a defense against it in correspondance then it won't hold up. The speed of development in some of the lines is pretty amazing though, I'd imagine you could use it on thi site up to a reasonably high level.
pretty awesome videos, although the opening itself seems best reserved for blitz or over the board play, as it loses some of its appeal in correspondence.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieFair enough. Still, there's a world of difference between Fischer (or Tony Miles!!) playing offbeat lines, and the quest for weird variations by weak players.
did not Fischer himself take off beat lines, as in the poisoned pawn variation of the Sicilian and develop new ideas? yes there is good reason why 2.d4 is the 'main line', but there are also alternatives, are there not? the annals of chess history are filled with those who have taken a fresh look at some variation and sparked new life into it. we ...[text shortened]... eces off with the prospect of simplification and an advantageous endgame as you have stated.
Originally posted by KorchFor example,
Latvian GM Normunds Miezis plays it. Only with different move order. 1.c4 e6 2.e4