G'Day,
Just wondering, what do you play against this?
Obviously 2. ..e5 is a strong solution, but if I wanted to have an open game on the board, I'd be playing 1. ..e5
The 2. ..d5 lines not only don't look like something I want to play, but Hector's (amongst others) convincing results seem to put them into question altogether.
Currently I'm playing 2. ..d6 as I was originally a Pirc player anyways and this just transposes, but this runs into the same issue as ..e5 -
even worsely so, as White retains all options, while ..e5 at least got a good shot at annoying Ruy/Giucco/Scotch exponents.
Now I found an
Andrew-Martin-Videosample on 2. ..e6. The positions arising after (the by him so called 'critical test') 3.e5 look like something I can dabble around with,
but 3.d4 doesn't look all too pleasing; transposing into a classical french is -again- something I'm not too fond of, and the 'natural'
doesn't look like something I want to indulge in OTB either. Am I missing something (I sure hope so!), or is 2...e6 hardly playable unless one is happy with transposing to a french?
Also, is there any material on 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 somewhere? Cox' SO-Book gives "I recommend 2..e5 (along with some analysis on 2...d5, but concludes it's ..unfavourable)",
Taylor (in A.Alert) not only recommends e5, but also gives some games on it (and neglects ..d5 as bad altogether).
So.. what do you do? Play 2...e5, happy to have avoided the most critical lines? Is there some merit in 2...e6 3.d4 which I'm missing (or maybe my assessment of the arising positions is simply false)?
Or do you go for 2...d5 against all odds?
I'm fairly at a loss what to play here - learning an entirely different opening (or even 4 in the case of ..e5) just to battle an offbeat try seems to be.. uneconomical.
Thanks in advance!