Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old August 11th 04, 12:03 PM
James McComb
 
Posts: n/a
Default Refutation for 1. e4 e5 2. Qh5

The game begins

1. e4 e5
2. Qh5

This is a premature Queen attack, so there should be a convincing
refutation, right? I don't know what it is, so I play

2 ... Nc6

And White annoys me with 3. Bc4.

I'm just a beginner, how should I punish 2. Qh5?

James McComb

  #2   Report Post  
Old August 11th 04, 01:38 PM
Hans Jørgen Lassen
 
Posts: n/a
Default Refutation for 1. e4 e5 2. Qh5


"James McComb" skrev i en meddelelse
...
The game begins


1. e4 e5
2. Qh5

This is a premature Queen attack, so there should be a convincing
refutation, right? I don't know what it is, so I play

2 ... Nc6

And White annoys me with 3. Bc4.

I'm just a beginner, how should I punish 2. Qh5?

James McComb


There is no refutation.

2...Nc6 3.Bc4 g6 is fine for Black.
You can also play 2...d6 3.Bc4 Nh6 which is alright too.

Tough guys (like myself!) would play 2...Nf6 3.Qe5 Be7 with very fine
compensation for the pawn, excellent development.

The choice to some extent depends on your style of play.

Hans J



  #5   Report Post  
Old August 13th 04, 03:37 AM
Claus-Jürgen Heigl
 
Posts: n/a
Default Refutation for 1. e4 e5 2. Qh5

levellerman wrote:

In practice after 4.Qf3-Nf6 white usually goes on with 5.c3 !- and
after 5..d6 6.h3 Be7
7.Ne2 0-0


I like 7...Be6 planning d5. If 8. Bxe6 fxe6 9. d3 0-0 10. Bh6 Rf7 it
is Black who attacks on the kingside. Also 9...h6 with the plan to
castle queenside and attack on the kingside looks interesting.

follows 8.g4 ! with devastating ( dev. for a beginner of
course) king side attack


8. g4 doesn't strike me as a particular good move. What's the threat?
8. d3 with the idea Bh6 looks more logical to me. White wants to
remove the black rook on the f-file. 8...Kg7!? prevents this though.

After 8. g4? Be6! Black has an excellent game. 9. Bxe6 fxe6 10. d3
(too late) 10...Nd7 11. Qe3 Bh4 12. 0-0 Qf6 and the black pressure on
the f-file is severe.
If 9. d3 d5 10. exd5 (10. Bb5? dxe4 11. dex4 Nxe4! loses a pawn
because of 12. Qxe4? Bd5; 10. Bb3 dxe4 11. dxe4 Bxb3 12. axb3 Qd7
followed by Rad8 and Qd3. White has massive problems on the d-file.)
Bxd5 11. Bxd5 Qxd5 12. Qxd5 Nxd5 Black is much better developed and
doesn't have as many weaknesses on the kingside as White has.

Even if Black plays a duffer's move like 8...a6 he gets a good game.
9. g5? (if that was the white idea, better is 9. d3 b5 10. Bb3 Na5 11.
Bc2 d5 and Black has a comfortable position) 9...Nh5 and the white
attack is already dead in its tracks. For example 10. h4 (else g5 is
lost) 10...Na5 (the Bc4 has to be removed from the diagonal before
Black can open the f-file) 11. Bd3 (11. Na3 Nxc4 is not any better)
11...f6 and the white kingside breaks apart.


If Black is fed up with White trying the Scholar's mate, why not go
for something different? 1. e4 e5 2. Qh5 Nc6 3. Bc4 g6 4. Qf3 f5
should hit White unprepared and isn't even a bad move.

The idea is to lure White into the capture at f5. If White takes at
f5, Black gains control of d5 and can quickly build an ideal pawn
center d5 and e5. If White is greedy and takes even more pawns, he is
quickly overwhelmed.

Some sample lines (far from exhaustive)

5. exf5 5...Nd4 and now:

6. Qd1?! d5 7. Bb3 Bxf5 8. Ba4+ c6 9. c3 Ne6 and Black is in great
shape.

6. Qg3 (could be best) 6...Qf6 7. Bb3 (c2 has to be covered, 7. Bd3 is
unsafe because of 7...d5 8. Nc3 c6 9. fxg6 e4 10. Nxe4 dxe4 11. Bxe4
Ne7 12. c3 Bf5 13. Bxf5 Nexf5 14. Qd3 Ne6 15. gxh7 Rxh7 16. Ne2 (16.
g4 Re7 doesn't work) 16...Qe5 (threat Nf4) 17. Qc4 Nh4 18. Kf1 0-0-0
White has a difficult defense.) 7...d5!? 8. fxg6 hxg6 9. d3 Rh5
(control of g5 is important, Black is hunting the queen!) 10. Nc3
(White can't contest g5, 10. h4? Nf5 11. Qf3 Nxh4 with Black
advantage) 10...c6 11. Nge2 Bd6 12. Bd2 (castling queenside is a lot
less dangerous, if 12. Be3 Nf5 13. Qf3 Nh4! 14. Qxf6 Nxg2+ 15. Kd2
Nxf6 with black advantage) 12...Nge7 13. h3 (the queen urgently needs
breathing space! If 13. f4 Nef5 14. Qf2 Bc5 15. Qf1 Nxe2 16. Nxe2 (17.
Kxe2 Rxh2! -+; 17. Qxe2 Ng3 -+) 17...Ne3 18. Bxe3 Bxe3. White has a
hard time) 13...Nef5 14. Qh2 Nh4! 15. 0-0-0 Nxb3+ 16. axb3 Qxf2. Black
has his pawn back and should be somewhat better with his strong center
and the bishops pair.

6. Qd5?! Qf6 7. Bb3 c6 8. Qa5 d5! 9. d3 (9. fxg6? Qxg6 10. Kf1 Nxb3
11. axb3 Qd3+ 12. Ne2 Bg4 13. Nbc3 Bd6 Black has a crushing attack)
9...Bxf5. Black has a very nice center, can win the bishops pair and
is better coordinated. Black should be better here.

6. Qc3? Bb4! 7. Qd3 d5 8. Bb3 (8. fxg6 dxc4 9. g7 cxd3 10. gxh8Q Nxc2+
11. Kf1 Kf8 -+ Black will win the Ra1 and can get his knight back out.
Black ends up with a piece more.) 8...Bxf5 with advantage.

6. Qe4 d6 7. Na3 (protects c2, wants to keep the bishop. 7. fxg6
sacrifices material but is not sufficient: 7...Bf5 8. Qb7 Rb8!
(8...Nxc2+ 9. Kf1 Nxa1 10. Qc6+ Ke7 11. Nc3 Nf6 12. d4 looks
dangerous) 9. Qd5 Bxg6 10. Bb3 (10. Na3 c6 11. Qxg8 Rxg8 12. Bxg8 Qg5
-+; 10. Qa5 Nxc2+ 11. Kf1 c6 -+) 10...Rxb3 11. cxb3 Bd3 (hunting the
queen) 12. Qb7 (12. Qa5 slips control of e4, 12...Qh4 13. Ne2 Qe4 14.
Nbc3 Qxg2 15. Ng3 Qf3 (threat Nc2 mate) 16. Nce2 Nxe2 and Black wins)
13. Nc2+ -+) 7...Nf6 8. Qe3 Ng4 9. Qg3 d5 10. Bd3 Bxa3 11. bxa3 (11.
Qxg4 Bc5 12. b4 Bb6 13. Bb2 e4 -/+) 11...Bxf5 12. Bb2 Bxd3 13. Qxd3
0-0 with strong initiative (13...Nxf2!? is a very interesting
sacrifice here but might ultimately not be winning).

Of course White can decline to capture at f5. But Black will succeed
at d5 anyway:

5. Nc3 Nd4 6. Qd1 fxe4 7. Bd5 Nf6 8. Bxe4 d5 9. Bf3 e4 10. Be2 Bc5
with a big advantage for Black.

5. c3 Nf6 6. d3 Na5 7. Nd2 Bg7 8. Ne2 Nxc4 9. Nxc4 fxe4 10. dxe4 d5
11. exd5 Bg4 with initiative.

5. Ne2 Nf6 6. Nbc3 d6 7. d3 f4 8. Nd5 h5 9. h3 g5 10. Nec3 Nd4 11.
Nxf6 Qxf6 12. Qd1 c6. Black has some space advantage.

Claus-Juergen


  #6   Report Post  
Old August 13th 04, 12:29 PM
levellerman
 
Posts: n/a
Default Refutation for 1. e4 e5 2. Qh5

Claus-Jürgen Heigl wrote in message ...
levellerman wrote:

In practice after 4.Qf3-Nf6 white usually goes on with 5.c3 !- and
after 5..d6 6.h3 Be7
7.Ne2 0-0


I like 7...Be6 planning d5. If 8. Bxe6 fxe6 9. d3 0-0 10. Bh6 Rf7 it
is Black who attacks on the kingside. Also 9...h6 with the plan to
castle queenside and attack on the kingside looks interesting.



Claus, your analysis is very good, next to absolute, but you miss the
whole point of my email. If a player were able to reach such depth of
judegement he would never play 2.Qh5 or if it is played against him he
would have no problems to hold regardless of his home preaparation or
lack of it.
My reply was only about what is the good move in the context of being
and playing against a weak player, the only situation when you can
face 2.Qh5 issue, NOT what is the absolute best reply plan.
  #7   Report Post  
Old August 13th 04, 05:08 PM
Claus-Jürgen Heigl
 
Posts: n/a
Default Refutation for 1. e4 e5 2. Qh5

levellerman wrote:

Claus, your analysis is very good, next to absolute, but you miss the
whole point of my email. If a player were able to reach such depth of
judegement he would never play 2.Qh5 or if it is played against him he
would have no problems to hold regardless of his home preaparation or
lack of it.


I thought that too until I checked the online database of Chesslive
who goes for the Scholar's mate and against what opposition. To my
surprise I found this was played even in a GM/IM level game,
Shaposhnikov - Vukanovic this year (White won).

My 4...f5!? was played only once, in a FM (Fide Master) level game
between Enrique Rios (Elo 2160) and Andrew Whatley (2317) (Black won).
So I am unfortunately not the first to propose this move

In my very first chess book, which I read after playing chess for half
a year, a game was given which went

1. e4 e5 2. Qh5 Nc6 3. Bc4 g6 4. Qf3 Nf6 5. Qb3 d5 (Black sacrifices a
pawn to speed up his development) 6. Bxd5 Nd4 7. Qc3 (7. Bxf7+ Ke7 8.
Qc4 b5 and the bishop is lost) 7...Nxd5 (clears the diagonal f5-c2) 8.
exd5 Bf5 (threat Nxc2+) 9. d3 Bb4! 0-1 (9. Qxb4 Nxc2+). To me it was a
real eye opener.

Beginners are confronted with the Scholar's mate once in a while,
often by someone a bit more experienced who goes for the quick mate. I
think it is important for a beginner (or even an intermediate player)
someone explains to him what the danger of an unsound line like 2. Qh5
is and what to do against it. Although I do not advice that the novice
player learns my lines by heart, I think it doesn't hurt him to look
at them and get an idea what he can do.

Of course I condensed my analysis as much as I could because I feared
I did something like an overkill already. The essence of my analysis
would be that the attack conducted by a mere two pieces is not really
dangerous, but of course you should defend the direct threats. But as
White violates basic opening principles by moving his queen around
early Black is entitled to sacrifice material for speed of development
and control of the center. Even if the whole kingside of Black is gone
the position is still worth it. Attacking chances will present itself
almost by default.

Your suggestion of 4...Qf6 is an absolute safe continuation. The
difference to 4...f5 is that 4...Qf6 only seeks to keep the balance,
if in a comfortable way. 4...f5 seeks to unbalance the position and is
a serious attempt at winning the game from the start. It immediately
makes Black the attacker which is what some players including
beginners might prefer.

I think it is alright for a beginner to look for ways of exploiting
imbalances of a game and not only to preserve the balance. A beginner
may not always be right in his judgement but the least he gets is more
exciting games.

Claus-Juergen
  #8   Report Post  
Old August 14th 04, 11:23 AM
levellerman
 
Posts: n/a
Default Refutation for 1. e4 e5 2. Qh5

Claus-Jürgen Heigl wrote in message ...

I think it is alright for a beginner to look for ways of exploiting
imbalances of a game and not only to preserve the balance. A beginner
may not always be right in his judgement but the least he gets is more
exciting games.

Claus-Juergen



Actually keeping (learning to keep) balance is one the most difficult
things for a beginner. One can say that this skill makes the
difference between master and laymen. The impulsive 2.Qh5 and your
forcefull attempts to refute it are examples of not understanding the
concept.

Emanuel Lasker thought "balance" as being the key of the chess game
( see : http://www.saf.pair.com/chess.htm )

"The direction of attack and defense is also circumscribed by the
rules of Steinitz in balanced position. The events may not have quite
the force, the action not quite the tension as in positions where one
side has superiority and has to bring it to bear against the efforts
of a well-condcted defense eager to assume counter-attack(3). For all
that, the connoisseur, observing how the master keeps the finally
drawn line of balance enjoys the situation profoundly. He who does not
comprehend the language of the moves that maintain the balance is
unable to read the signs which predict the advent of great events; he
who knows that language understands also the logic by which such great
events are brought about."

Emanuel Lasker, "Lasker's Manual of Chess," (1947; rpt. New York:
Dover, 1960), p. 215.
  #9   Report Post  
Old August 14th 04, 12:17 PM
Hans Jørgen Lassen
 
Posts: n/a
Default Refutation for 1. e4 e5 2. Qh5


"levellerman" skrev i en meddelelse
om...
Claus-Jürgen Heigl wrote in message

...

I think it is alright for a beginner to look for ways of exploiting
imbalances of a game and not only to preserve the balance. A beginner
may not always be right in his judgement but the least he gets is more
exciting games.

Claus-Juergen



Actually keeping (learning to keep) balance is one the most difficult
things for a beginner. One can say that this skill makes the
difference between master and laymen. The impulsive 2.Qh5 and your
forcefull attempts to refute it are examples of not understanding the
concept.


I am not quite sure what this discussion is all about. Does "keeping the
balance" (or trying to) mean going for a draw? Or what does it mean?

In the example discussed (2. Qh5) I think a teacher should explain to the
beginner that early moves by the Queen are not in general a good idea as the
Queen might get exposed. The teacher should also explain to Black that he
should not necessarily try to exploit the position of the Queen on the next
move, but that the possibility of doing so should be kept in mind. And when
that possibility arises, then dont hesitate!

The concept of balance, in my opinion, does not belong at beginner's level.
More simple things should come first, like this Queen might be threatened by
enemy pieces, and then you will have to move it loosing time.

I personally would reply with 2...Nf6, creating a position that may be in a
dynamical sort of balance (development vs. material) but with very lively
play and a lot of tension. However, I guess such a way of playing should not
be recommended to a beginner.

Hans J (former chess instructor)


  #10   Report Post  
Old August 24th 04, 08:43 PM
Ron
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
"Hans Jørgen Lassen" wrote:


I personally would reply with 2...Nf6, creating a position that may be in a
dynamical sort of balance (development vs. material) but with very lively
play and a lot of tension. However, I guess such a way of playing should not
be recommended to a beginner.


FWIW, I think this is a great way for a beginner to play.

Beacuse, let's face it, beginners aren't going to be able to nurse a
pawn advantage for an entire game, anyway. Why not just give up the
pawn for time? It's not like black's compensation for the pawn is
difficult to see here.

I HATE the suggestion of 2.Qh5 g6 3.Qf3 Qf6? because that's playing
scared chess. Black's been handed an advantage, so he ought to use it.
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:07 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017