1.e4 e5; 2 Nf3 Qe7;... almost unbeatable, at least as good as anything
else in the e4 e5 complex. Try it yourself. I'm having a ball with
it on ICC.

On Jul 19, 4:11 pm, Old Haasie wrote:
1.e4 e5; 2 Nf3 Qe7;... almost unbeatable, at least as good as anything
else in the e4 e5 complex. Try it yourself. I'm having a ball with
it on ICC.

The queen is misplaced on e7. It is better to play 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 f6
and then the bishop can freely develop.

I have a good line for White too!!

On Sat, 19 Jul 2008 13:11:02 -0700 (PDT), Old Haasie
wrote:

1.e4 e5; 2 Nf3 Qe7;... almost unbeatable, at least as good as anything
else in the e4 e5 complex. Try it yourself. I'm having a ball with
it on ICC.

I remember studying some of his lines in what he the "Queen's Defense"
in his Neue Errofnungswege, back about 1966. Good for fast chess,
especially against book-meisters, but only once or twice.

Just because one is not a "serious" chessplayer that doesn't mean they
should talk up **** openings.

But if one is a **** person like Old Haasie or Sloan, it makes sense
that all they can do is crap all over the board with this opening and
the Damiano. "**** begets ****."

On Jul 19, 4:15�pm, samsloan wrote:
On Jul 19, 4:11 pm, Old Haasie wrote:


The queen is misplaced on e7. .....

=========================
OK, after some experience with the Gunderam, I think you guys are
right. I'm giving up on it.

Old Haasie