You can go for philidor lion variation, that kind of setup is good.
If you do not want 2...e5 or 2...d5, then 2...e6 or 2...d6 also work.
Since you asked
Theoretically 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 f5?! is bad. Best and ONLY way to play is e5. If you do not play e4 e5 openings, well, too bad for you. It is not your mistake, but Nizmo itself is also considered not to be the best opening (even with 2.d4). So in terms of high league play, Nimzo itself is a bad choice. But if you still want to play it, then you should know what problems you get yourself into, including playing worse positions...
Theoretically 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 f5?! is bad. Best and ONLY way to play is e5. If you do not play e4 e5 openings, well, too bad for you. It is not your mistake, but Nizmo itself is also considered not to be the best opening (even with 2.d4). So in terms of high league play, Nimzo itself is a bad choice. But if you still want to play it, then you should know what problems you get yourself into, including playing worse positions...
Theory and practice are not the same. Theoretically 1...Nc6? is worse than 1...e5!. To "refute" 1...Nc6? white should play 2 d4!, so 2 Nf3? is theoretically worse than 2 d4!. To take advantage of 2 Nf3? black should play 2...e5!, so theoretically 2...f5?, 2...d5?, 2...d6?, 2...e6?, 2...g6? are all worse.
In practice things are different. After 1...Nc6! white is in unchartered territory, something he has rarely encountered or studied. The cowardly 2 Nf3? says: "I'd rather go back to what I know. I do not want to play a position I am unfamiliar with." In that light 2...e5? plays into white's hand, while 2...f5!, 2...d5!, 2...d6!, 2...e6!, 2...g6! achieve what white seeks to avoid.
In practice things are different. After 1...Nc6! white is in unchartered territory, something he has rarely encountered or studied. The cowardly 2 Nf3? says: "I'd rather go back to what I know. I do not want to play a position I am unfamiliar with." In that light 2...e5? plays into white's hand, while 2...f5!, 2...d5!, 2...d6!, 2...e6!, 2...g6! achieve what white seeks to avoid.
You know how dumb this logic is?
a)1.e4 Nc6 is not a mistake, it is an offer for white to play 2.d4 and get the option of 2.d4 e5 or ...d5 , Which still results in slighlty worse play, but only with best moves
b)1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 is not a mistake, rather a smart move. Instead of learning the Nimzo (which I do not know a clear path to advantage) I force you to play 2. ... e5 to play my game, my positions. The ones I intended to play after 1.e4, my preparation. So you either have to get into my terrain, or you have to play a really bad move.
c)by playing 2. ... f5'!' you basicly lose on a high level meta. On regular it is a bad move you can play. But NEVER EVER this is an eplanation mark. Since to punish it you do not need any theory, but jsut basic chess understanding, develop your pieces, attack weak squares.
So white says I rather play a familiar equal position that I know instead of chasing an advantage I have no idea of, and in return black is the one saying, well then, I rather play a bad move than letting you have your familiar position. You suicide your own position jsut in hope (for what basically)? That your oponent cannot play chess and you win just because he has no theory?
All in all your comment is disrespecting to your opponent (I am the best and win every position just because he is unfamiliar), disrespecting to all chess teachings (how to play an opening, how to evaluate a position) and on top disrespecting to your own gameplay (Instead of comparing our strenghts and improve I do everything jsut that he does not get his play, even if it hurts my play even more). You literally made me facepalm with that one
And to add- your suggestions to the diagramm are pure shit. Objectivly, this is a worse french. If you want to play french, play 1.e4 e6, so you have the option to play c7-c5. In concrete variations I jsut take your line 8.h3 Nh6 9.Bxh6 gxh6 10.Bb5 and e.g. 10 ... fxe5 11.Bxc6 Bxc6 12.Nxe5 with 13.Qh5+ incomming
You know if you do not understand the matter you can make things worse with your advice. The Author might trust and listen to you and in that case you do not only hurt yourself, but also drag everyone who believe in your words (since with same level it is hard to prove just by your comments if you are competent enough to help him, aka do you actually know what you are talking about). If anyone finds this offensive, sadly that is the harsh truth
a)1.e4 Nc6 is not a mistake, it is an offer for white to play 2.d4 and get the option of 2.d4 e5 or ...d5 , Which still results in slighlty worse play, but only with best moves
b)1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 is not a mistake, rather a smart move. Instead of learning the Nimzo (which I do not know a clear path to advantage) I force you to play 2. ... e5 to play my game, my positions. The ones I intended to play after 1.e4, my preparation. So you either have to get into my terrain, or you have to play a really bad move.
c)by playing 2. ... f5'!' you basicly lose on a high level meta. On regular it is a bad move you can play. But NEVER EVER this is an eplanation mark. Since to punish it you do not need any theory, but jsut basic chess understanding, develop your pieces, attack weak squares.
So white says I rather play a familiar equal position that I know instead of chasing an advantage I have no idea of, and in return black is the one saying, well then, I rather play a bad move than letting you have your familiar position. You suicide your own position jsut in hope (for what basically)? That your oponent cannot play chess and you win just because he has no theory?
All in all your comment is disrespecting to your opponent (I am the best and win every position just because he is unfamiliar), disrespecting to all chess teachings (how to play an opening, how to evaluate a position) and on top disrespecting to your own gameplay (Instead of comparing our strenghts and improve I do everything jsut that he does not get his play, even if it hurts my play even more). You literally made me facepalm with that one
And to add- your suggestions to the diagramm are pure shit. Objectivly, this is a worse french. If you want to play french, play 1.e4 e6, so you have the option to play c7-c5. In concrete variations I jsut take your line 8.h3 Nh6 9.Bxh6 gxh6 10.Bb5 and e.g. 10 ... fxe5 11.Bxc6 Bxc6 12.Nxe5 with 13.Qh5+ incomming
You know if you do not understand the matter you can make things worse with your advice. The Author might trust and listen to you and in that case you do not only hurt yourself, but also drag everyone who believe in your words (since with same level it is hard to prove just by your comments if you are competent enough to help him, aka do you actually know what you are talking about). If anyone finds this offensive, sadly that is the harsh truth
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1886251
You should give some advice to Levon Aronian and Magnus Carlsen.
So Aronian plays 2...e6 and Carlsen plays 2...d6.
You should give some advice to Levon Aronian and Magnus Carlsen.
So Aronian plays 2...e6 and Carlsen plays 2...d6.
And how did the game go FunnyAnimator? Asking, because I am slightly higher rated here then you, but OTB people rated FIDE 2150 simply blow me off the board, and somehow I suspect that your opening choice was of little importance ....
here are his games :) He played some good games :)
Congratulations on beating a 2150 FIDE rated player and winning the tournament! Apparently FunnyAnimator is much stronger OTB then on lichess. Unfortunately exactly the opposite holds true for me....
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.