Center game
Sort:
Dec 26, 2007
0
#2
I suspect, though I can't say this authoritatively, that when Black plays the Scandinavian, it's to dictate where the play happens early. When White plays the Center Game with that same objective, it's somewhat pointless, since with the initiative of starting first, white generally should be able to do that anyway after 1.e4 e5 with a sounder opening.
Thank you Absurd. I think there may be some logic in that suggestion, I do however still believe that it is a good opening, maybe black can equalize more quickly then the Ruy Lopez, but i will try using the Center Game and post my results.
Dec 26, 2007
0
#4
Though the center game lacks popularity at top level because GM know how to neutralize it, it's certainly an interesting weapon at club level.
Hicentnunc, I see you are rate quite highly, do you know some lines that result in an equalizing for black, I am curious to see some. I have looked up some games on chessbase and the like and it does seem like black does well against it, and that it is rarely used any longer.
Absurd wrote:I suspect, though I can't say this authoritatively, that when Black plays the Scandinavian, it's to dictate where the play happens early. When White plays the Center Game with that same objective, it's somewhat pointless, since with the initiative of starting first, white generally should be able to do that anyway after 1.e4 e5 with a sounder opening.
That's right on the money. While there's nothing wrong with the Center Game, White simply has much better options after 1 ... e5. For example, the Ruy Lopez gives White much better chances of keeping his opening advantage.
well_hung_pawn wrote:Hicentnunc, I see you are rate quite highly, do you know some lines that result in an equalizing for black, I am curious to see some.
Any opening book (MCO, NCO, etc.) will easily provide the answers. You should be able to pick up a cheap copy on Amazon.com.
Thank you for your informative comments, I am sort of a tyro to chess, but i really enjoy looking at and analyzing openings, traps and the like. Of course being new to chess however my analysis is often flawed so this chess.com forum is great for me, i want to thank you all again.
Dec 27, 2007
0
#9
well_hung_pawn wrote: Hicentnunc, I see you are rate quite highly, do you know some lines that result in an equalizing for black, I am curious to see some. I have looked up some games on chessbase and the like and it does seem like black does well against it, and that it is rarely used any longer.
I think 3.Qxd4 Nc6 4.Qe3 Nf6 5.Nc3 Be7 6.Bd2 d5!? is quite solid for black - for example there is the game Adams-Anand, Linares 1994
and 4...g6 is very sturdy too, like for example in Ian Nepomniachtchi vs Gabriel Sargissian, Aeroflot 2007
Maybe white can try 4. Qa4 instead, more in the spirit of the 3... Qa5 Scandinavian. Then it's the question whether the extra pawn move is an advantage (more space) or a disadvantage (it may become vulnerable). I think it may well be worth some investigation.
Dec 27, 2007
0
#11
Yes 4.Qa4 is a try - but if black doesn't open the center too quickly (by playing d5), I don't think white can build a big advantage with the reversed scandinavian...
A sample line runs : 4.Qa4 Nf6 5.Nf3 Bc5 with d6/Bd7 to follow - looks fine for black.
Sure, that looks fine for black, but it also looks fine for white. If black could always get such a position from the Scandinavian, black players would more often play the Scandinavian.
White probably doesn't build up a big advantage from the opening, but 95% of the games us normal people play are not decided by a tiny theoretical opening advantage, but by middlegame play and just general strength. So if the opening is just to make it to the middlegame with a fine position and not having to dive in the opening books, then maybe the Center game could be a good choice.
Still I think there must be another reason why the Center game is played so rarely. I've never ever faced it, although I did face other unorthodox openings like the Bird's and the Orang Utan. Maybe also the fact that there are few to no books on the Center game is a reason why it's so seldom played, or maybe some good players ever got horrible losses with it as white?
Dec 27, 2007
0
#14
Phobetor, I agree with you when you say that the position looks fine for both, and is certainly playable at amateur level. I was simply giving an answer to well hung's initial question : w hich lines I think give black something as close to = as possible in this opening.
Maybe this opening suffers from a bad reputation and lack of general knowledge among chess players. It has been considered as unpromising for a very long time, and no living legend has ever endorsed it in top level chess (as far as I know, only Moro played it a few times). Besides, other openings like Scotch and King's Gambit have a lot of followers, and promise active play if you don't want to delve into the complications of the Ruy.
But from a practical point of view, it offers lots of advantages :
- many players with black are unprepared to meet it, and play passively (for example an early d6)
- white often gets attacking chances, thanks to opposite castling
- you can't really avoid it as black, and white is bound to have more experience with it
So, I would wholeheartedly recommend it to any player as a very good practical weapon (but don't try it against Karpov ;-) 
I am in the process of playing a game in which I utilized this opening against a quality player. I conclude that this opening should not be used by white since it will cause for white to make an early defensive move, thus allowing black to take offense. I am no grandmaster, but I do recommend the use of more assertive openings.
chessmanson wrote: I am in the process of playing a game in which I utilized this opening against a quality player. I conclude that this opening should not be used by white since it will cause for white to make an early defensive move, thus allowing black to take offense. I am no grandmaster, but I do recommend the use of more assertive openings.
99% of games is decided by the quality of both players rather than the opening. So if you lost or have a bad position, no offense, but that can also just be because he's better. Maybe when you analyze it with Fritz you'll come to the conclusion that you only got a bad position because you missed a good move somewhere, not because you played 2. d4.
But of course, playing this rather toothless opening probably won't increase your chances of victory. Like I said, it could just be useful for those players that don't have the time or will to learn heavy theoretical openings (where they could also be worse from the opening), and prefer this less theoretical opening. It can also serve as a surprise weapon, or as an alternative opening when you're tired of your main opening.
Awesome comments guys... I do like the fact that it is tough for black to avoid, forces him/her into a game that white is comftorble with. Unfortunately it does not have many early attacking chances but I think it seems fun, I played a few games on FICS just experimenting, i won about half the time which is about my win rate with any opening on FICS. I think i am ready to try a couple game on Chess.com and see how they go.
Dec 27, 2007
0
#18
ketchuplover wrote: According to chessgames.com black leads 41.5% to 39.6% out of 316 games
Isn't the rating of the player with the black pieces superior on average ? That could explain the statistics as well as the intrinsic value of the opening.
41.5# to 39.6% is alot less than the statistics you gave for the Philidor Hanham variation 
Of course this is an opening for white, but this score of about 40-40 just says that a) both have chances to win (so also white), and b) there are only few draws 
Like hicetnunc said, you'll probably have to adjust it if you take into account the ratings. Black could be any 1... e5 player (so theoretically also Anand or Kramnik) but white is a Center Game player, so in most of the cases a lower rated player.
And besides the ratings, the number of games is not very high. 41.5% is about 131 games, 39.6% is about 125 games. It's too few games to base real conclusions on. If I go to a 9-round tournament and win five center games as white, while losing one as black, it would already be tied again
What happened to the center game, why is it no longer used? I see the Scandinavian defense used all the time (1 e4 d5) but the center game (1 e4 e5 2d4 3xd4 2 Qxd4...) is never see used any more. I understand that black is able to develop with tempo, but i would think white could just mirror blacks play in the Scandi and do a Qa4 move, in this case whites queen is relatively free from threats, white has some stake in the center and both bishops are free to develop, what am i missing?