Opening Lessons for Beginners -1

Originally posted by allostery
So far, all we've really learned is that Ng5 is bad, that e6 is the best reply (even though it doesn't exactly aid in black development either). Shouldn't teaching chess include some explanation as to why? Should something be said here about how black is going to capitalize on white's mistake? I guess, in other words, do you reprimand a student for playing this, or just discourage it?

Sorry if you're talking about the 2 knights defence (1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6) then since black's first move was e7-e5 he's going to have a job playing 4. ... e6. If you mean 4. ... d6 then white has Nxf7 which wins the pawn and the exchange, or Bxf7+ which is also poor for black. Black's best move is 4. ... d5 (I think you'll find Arrakis and I agree on this). When white normally takes. Black basically has to tough it out.

Arrakis's contention is that the move 4. Ng5 is not the best since it moves a piece a second time in the opening, thereby causing white to start to lag in developement. My feeling is that it's ok as black has to defend and unlike with the Scholar's mate type attacks white should be able to compensate for his lag in developement because black has to do something about the attack, so white catches up with his developement and has some hopes of retaining the pressure.

Arrakis's claim is that in grandmaster play white can at best hope for a draw. I feel that it isn't as simple as that. Tarrasch described 4. Ng5 as "a beginner's move", and there are plenty of Grandmaster's who'd agree, but for example Nigel Short is quite happy to play 4. Ng5 and did so at the EU championships held in Liverpool last year against Mark Hebden (classical time limits - but Short has a rating 150 odd points higher than Hebden):

[Event "ch-EU"]
[Site "Liverpool ENG"]
[Date "2006.09.15"]
[Round "10"]
[White "Short, Nigel D"]
[Black "Hebden, Mark L"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteElo "2676"]
[BlackElo "2532"]
[ECO "C58"]
[EventDate "2006.09.06"]

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Na5 6.Bb5+ c6 7.dxc6 bxc6
8.Qf3 h6 9.Ne4 Nd5 10.Ba4 Be7 11.d3 O-O 12.O-O f5 13.Ng3 Be6 14.Re1
Bd6 15.c4 Ne7 16.Bd2 c5 17.Nc3 a6 18.Nd5 Nac6 19.Bxc6 Nxc6 20.Bc3 Qe8
21.h3 Rd8 22.Re2 Bb8 23.Rae1 a5 24.a3 Nd4 25.Bxd4 cxd4 26.Nb6 e4 27.
dxe4 f4 28.Nf1 Qc6 29.Nd5 Qxc4 30.Nd2 Qb5 31.Qb3 Qxb3 32.Nxb3 Bxd5
33.exd5 Rxd5 34.Rd2 Be5 35.Nc1 a4 36.Nd3 Bd6 37.Rc2 f3 38.g3 h5 39.
Rc4 h4 40.g4 Ra5 41.Rxd4 Rf6 42.Ree4 Bc7 43.Kf1 Rc6 44.Rxa4 Rxa4 45.
Rxa4 Rd6 46.Ne1 Rd1 47.Re4 Rb1 48.Re8+ Kh7 49.Rf8 Bd6 50.Rxf3 Rxb2
51.Rc3 Be5 52.Rd3 Bb8 53.Nf3 Ba7 54.Rd2 Rb3 55.Kg2 Rxa3 56.Nxh4 Bb8
57.Nf3 Bf4 58.Rd4 g5 59.h4 1-0

Originally posted by DeepThought
Sorry if you're talking about the 2 knights defence (1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6) then since black's first move was e7-e5 he's going to have a job playing 4. ... e6. If you mean 4. ... d6 then white has Nxf7 which wins the pawn and the exchange, or Bxf7+ which is also poor for black. Black's best move is 4. ... d5 (I think you'll find Arrakis and I b3 55.Kg2 Rxa3 56.Nxh4 Bb8
57.Nf3 Bf4 58.Rd4 g5 59.h4 1-0

Go back to the first message and look at the nice diagram I put in there so that everyone would know the position we are talking about. 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 g6 4.Ng5?

You are the one who brought up a different line, an attack against the Two Knights Defence with 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5. That's not what this discussion is about. I did say that I don't think it's a good line for White, but you're missing the whole point of this lecture.
The example I gave 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 g6 gives 4.Ng5? as a questionable move because it starts a premature attack.
I'm trying to teach people to develop their pieces before launching an attack and you're not helping.

Originally posted by Arrakis
Go back to the first message and look at the nice diagram I put in there so that everyone would know the position we are talking about. 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 g6 4.Ng5?

You are the one who brought up a different line, an attack against the Two Knights Defence with 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5. That's not what this discussion is about. I did say tha ...[text shortened]... to teach people to develop their pieces before launching an attack and you're not helping.

Against that line I tend to agree; there 4. ... e6 is available, in the 2 knight's it is not. However, the idea that you can just unthinkingly apply opening rules has lost me more games of chess than you've had hot dinners. This is why I pointed out that I feel that opening rules are best expressed in terms of their potential consequences rather than as absolutes - chess isn't rule based, what is true in the position you gave is not in the two knights because the line to f7 can't be blocked as easily - people have to be aware of this.

Originally posted by lausey
Here is a game against Robert Oppenheimer (directed the Manhattan Project):

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1261614

Where did Oppenheimer go wrong?

Please post your question in a new thread.

Originally posted by Arrakis
Please post your question in a new thread.

You brought up Albert Einstein. My post was in direct reference to that because it was a game he played. It was a simple question which required a quick answer, and didn't justify a whole new thread.

It also has relevance because they both are not very strong players. So pointing out where the flaws were would be helpful for beginners.

Originally posted by lausey
You brought up Albert Einstein. My post was in direct reference to that because it was a game he played. It was a simple question which required a quick answer, and didn't justify a whole new thread.

It also has relevance because they both are not very strong players. So pointing out where the flaws were would be helpful for beginners.

It is hard to pick 'the blunder' move, because both players didn't play the opening very accurately (from black's move 6 onwards). But certainly 11. ... f6? was a mistake. With Be6 black could still have defended, be it from an inferior position). And then 15. ... Qd6? allowed white to win even faster