36 ( +1 | -1 )
Central counter game with 2...c6
I would like very much to hear your ideas on the Central Counter Game (1. e4 d5 2. exd5) with 2... c6, intending 3. dxc6 Nxc6
Wich are the drawbacks of this system for black? I imagine there is no enough compensation for the pawn, but I am not sure about this and cannot find any info.
What do you think?
Thanks and regards,
101 ( +1 | -1 )
Center Counter (Scandinavian for Europeans)
Not so very long ago 2.-/c6 was discussed at ChessWorld.net where I also play. A guy there pretended it to be a strong move, given one of his won games (OTB played at lunchtime at the job...). No one of the forum guests agreed. Didn't find it in my database either.
I replayed that particular game and, indeed, he/she won it. But how! It was a real 'Comedy of Errors'! By both sides anyhow. Blunder after blunder.
Personally I would never play 2.-/c6. OTB I regularly play the Scandinavian, but always by the book: 1.e4 / d5 - 2.exd5 / Qxd5 (never 2. -/Nf6 either), generally continued: 3.Nc3/Qa5, etc.
A fine book on the Scandinavian is written by John Emms (The Chess Press, Brighton in association with Cadogan Press). It only treats 2-/Qxd5 and 2.-/Nf6.
Neither is there any trace of 2.-/c6 in 'Center Counter' by IMs John Grefe & Jeremy Silman (Chess Enterprised, Inc.).
So, I very much doubt there's any value in 2.-/c6. If you have any proof to the contrarary, I would be grateful to either read it here, or at my email address
Thanks very much & Kindest regards
52 ( +1 | -1 )
1.e4 d5; 2.exd5 c6;
My database of Corr games (where if any where at all, you would expect this line to be tried) comes up with 53 games.
White reply of "d4" has been tried 5 times and scores 70%
White reply of "dxc6" has been tried 45 times and scores 67%
White reply of "c4" has been tried 2 times and scores 50%
I agree with Janpot, either Qxd5 or Nf6 seems a better choice here.
If 2...Nf6 then after 2.d4 Black can try 3...c6 or 3...e6 (Icelandic Gambit) which are interesting options (especially with OTB play!!)
24 ( +1 | -1 )
"Wich are the drawbacks of this system for black? I imagine there is not enough compensation for the pawn..."
Hit the nail on the head right there. Unless you're playing blitz chess, sacrificing a pawn for a half tempi smacks of hubris.
64 ( +1 | -1 )
1. e4 d5 2. exd5 c6 is not fast enough from Black's perspective. At least when White plays this type of thing, he has the extra move so by the time the pawn exchange on c3 occurs he already has moved his e-pawn. Here, with 3. dxc6 Nxc6 4. Nf3, Black doesn't even really have a lead in development.
If Black wants to play something like this, White needs to commit to some positionally weakening moves first so Black has something to take advantage of. For instance, 1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Nf6 3. c4 and now 3... c6. If 4. dxc6 anyway, 4... Nxc6 and now Black has a development lead and play against White's weaknesses (4. d4 is better).
43 ( +1 | -1 )
2. .. c6 IS mentioned by Grefe & Silman, have a look at the top of page 9. To quote : " 2. .. c6? is an unsound gambit best disposed by 3.dxc6 Nxc6 4.Nf3 e5 5.Bb5."
The same line is discussed by Harman & Taulbut in "Winning with the Scandinavian". The refer to the game Vergani-Blackburne , Hastings 1985, which continues 5.d3 with comments "White plays too passively, allowing Black to take the initiative. 5. Bb5 is correct, when White has a clear advantage".
7 ( +1 | -1 )
Sorry for having overlooked that. You're right. thanks!
37 ( +1 | -1 )
To the game quoted by keiserpaul, Vergani-Blackburne (Hastings 1895), Pillsbury noted in the Tournament Book against 2...c6, "Black sacrifices a pawn for the purpose of obtaining a quick development, expecting to bewilder his less experienced opponent. He obtains no sufficient compensation, however, during the opening."