Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 
Topic Tools
Hot Topic (More than 10 Replies) 4 Qe2 vs. Two Knights Defence?! (Read 7353 times)
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10516
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: 4 Qe2 vs. Two Knights Defence?!
Reply #1 - 04/22/07 at 20:26:36
Post Tools
4.Qe2 is not in my sources: Pachmann's Moderne Schachtheorie and Heyken/Fette's Theorie der Schacheröffnungen. I recall having seen it in an obscure English book called Black Countergambits (Hartson?).
It has been a long time since I looked at it. After 4...Bc5 White has problems to force d2-d4 because of the relative weakness of f2 - that is to say, if Rfd1 is necessary. Moreover Black has sometimes the annoying ...Na5.
I also recall, that the Marshall like idea looks even stronger. All in all I got the impression, that the bishop was better on b3 than on c4. My conclusion was, that playing d3 was best anyway - then why not 4.d3 at once?
But hell, I could have got it all wrong. This is a typical case of do your own work and draw your own conclusions.
One thing is for sure: after 4.Qe2 d6? 5.Ng5 White is clearly better.
  

The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
mad_knight
Junior Member
**
Offline


aargh!

Posts: 86
Location: antwerp
Joined: 11/25/04
Gender: Male
4 Qe2 vs. Two Knights Defence?!
04/22/07 at 14:05:28
Post Tools
Hi everyone,

I'd like to play the Italian game as White while avoiding the complications of the Two Knights Defence.  I don't like the closed game after 4 d3, nor do I want to play the Boden-Kieseritsky Gambit after 4 0-0 Nxe4; 5 Nc3.  

There seems to be a 3d possibility, though:  4 Qe2, which looks akin to the Worrall Attack in the Ruy Lopez.  However, I couldn't find many games in this variation, and in almost all of them White would quickly follow up with d3, which I certainly wouldn't play. I don't think Pinski covers this line in his book on the Two Knights, since the Table of Contents only mentions 4 d3 besides the main lines 4 Ng5 and 4 d4.  

John Emms, however, does mention it in his excellent "Play the Open Games with Black", saying:

"it's not a bad move, but it does commit the Queen to e2 rather early.  That said, e2 can be a reasonable square for the White Queen, especially after Rfd1, c3 and d4 , so this plan must be treated with respect."  

After 4 ...e7; 5 c3 0-0; 6 0-0, he gives 2 variations, a solid one with 6 ...d6 and a Marshall-style gambit with 6 ...d5!?, but they both end at move 10.  Sad 

Emms' comment is certainly ecourageing but alas, not quite enough to assess this line, let alone try it out over the board.  So I'd very much appreciate any comments, reference to books, articles, and/or games anyone out there could come up with in connection with this line.
Many Smiley
  

Age cannot wither her, nor custom stale her infinite variety - William Shakespeare
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo