Now, Joe, if you fall into stereotypical thinking, you’re setting yourself up to suffer damage (to your rating - and you actually do play rated chess these days, unlike most posters here, most chess politicians, and even most ordinary USCF members your age.)
By “Center Counter” you wouldn’t mean “Scandinavian Defense,” would you? You aren’t implying you consider it in the same class with the Albin, 1.b4 and other such crap? If so, you should publish your findings - so as to enlighten the consensus of Grandmaster opinion that today considers 1…d5 an entirely respectable defense. If instead your opinion is based on what you “knew” circa 1975 or so, then I suspect you’re in for a painful awakening one of these days in your over-the-board adventures (assuming you play 1.e4). Lets hope that inevitable lesson reaches you at the hands of a fellow master or titled player, rather than a well-booked C-player.
Even what one might label the “Extended English Defense” - and could be easily confused with one of those “show contempt for the opponent” maneuvers I mentioned earlier - 1…a6 followed by 2…b5 - is deceptively tough to crack. Just ask Karpov. I’ve seen analyses (by strong players, I forget who) of his famous loss to Miles, that find no clear way White could have attained anything beyond a normal opening plus.
I drew the line at Nakamura’s 2.Qh5 experiments. Yet even there, Dennis Monokroussos - who although untitled, regularly publishes more-accurate and more-instructive (post-mortem) analysis of top games than just about any GM or IM I’ve ever seen - has opined (backed by concrete analysis he published) that Black’s best attempt at refutation is to pitch the e-pawn immediately, with 2…Nf6.
I don’t recall whether Dennis concluded that natural-looking alternatives (i.e. 2…Nc6) lead to mere equality (which of course should well satisfy Black), or actually let White get the advantage. If the latter, which implies 2…Nf6 is Black’s only good response - then how many opponents - even GMs, let alone club players - would have the cojones to sack a pawn with Black on move 2? If the vast majority of (even strong) opponents refrain from the only good response, then 2.Qh5 is (as a matter of pure logic - no matter what you knee-jerk thinkers say) a better practical weapon than any of the more “normal” opening oddities being discussed in this thread.
Yes, John, the Scandinavian did fit the Albin catagory until Anand got a good game from Kasparov. It was Bobby J. vs. Mednis that put the Center Counter away for decades.
I expect to see you at Chess-in-the-park tournament.
As I teach my kids: any move that aims at the center and developes should be considered. 2. Qh5 is playable, but there could be better. I had a kid quickly reach 1200 from 400 on just the Center Game.
One more critical line (teaching the opening to beginners should be a USCF Issue): 2…Nc6 3.Bc4 g6 4.Qf3 Nf6 (the natural move) and now a former student taught me why 5.Qb3? was bad: 5…Nd4! 6.Bxf7+ (6.Qd3 d5! crunch as …Bf5 is on after exd5) 6…Ke7 7.Qc4 b5! -+
5.Ne2 improves, which is why I like the 4…f5! line better. 5.Ne2 improves in that line, too.
More Rybka than me, but it makes sense. Note how the Qf6 becomes sensitive to the f2-f4 lever or exposed after d2-d4 or Nc3-d5 ideas. Also, the otherwise stupid Qh5(*) can hope to offer itself in trade on g5.
OTOH, there is something to be said for deferring …g6. In some of these lines, the Nf3 is really boxing the poor Qh5 in, and White has to be careful.
(*) Moderators, I should clarify that I do not believe that the Queen on h5 is intrinsically stupid, but merely that it is positioned stupidly at this moment in the game. Also, no offense to the h5 square is intended.
After 4.Nc3 g6, Rybka spits out the cute 5.Qd1! (Not very human, is it? But very logical: now White is harmonious & Black isn’t.) So maybe Nakamura circa 2005 wasn’t as crazy as we thought he was…
It’s amazing how beautiful this game can be, even in such “silly” lines!
Back to the Albin. Black only has one tempo plus the annoying wedge pawn for the CENTER pawn. Not enough!
In addition to the sensible line Joe mentioned, I like 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.a3 followed by an early b4 (Avrukh recommends this line in his 1.d4 repertoire.) Black is hoping to gin up an early kingside attack; White can afford to defer castling & start with immediate queenside play.
Of course if you’ve outworked your opponent in opening prep, all this is playable. I saw a 1700 easily draw a former 1900 with the Albin last weekend in the old main line with g3. And White was happy to draw.
I still hold that learning, (not mimicking) the openings of grandmasters is the way to advancement. The Albin is not one of those openings that 25% of the top players use.
I was fortunate to start with the Sicilian in my first tournament game in 1969. I have been playing the Najdorf continuously since 1971. I’ll match my opening analysis with anyone under 2500. Indeed the few senior masters that allowed a lower rated player like me to play the Najdorf have suffered. After the first ten years, it was easy to update current trends, and to come up with some ideas of my own. But chess playing has been a lifetime experience.
