Opinions on 1.Nc3?

Hi,

What are your opinions on 1.Nc3 (the VanGeet Opening)? This move can be played as an independent opening, as a transpositional tool, or just to avoid theory.

I was thinking as using it as a transpositional tool to the King's Gambit in the event of 1...e5 by playing 2.e4 and 3.f4. But in the event of 1...d5, I was planning on playing 2.f4.

Now, I realized there might be 2 problems with this. The first is that the Nc3 might be awkwardly placed on c3 in the Bird's Opening, usually you want the knight to develop to d2.

As is made clear in the diagram above, the knight belongs on d2. Thus I realized that my scheme involving 1.Nc3 d5/c5 2.f4 may be questionable as the knight is misplaced.

Then, even more doubt was cast upon my idea when I learnt that

is apparently unfavorable for white because black reaches "Easy Equality".

Dismayed and disappointed, I tried to repair my idea of 1.Nc3 by following the idea recommend in Paul vanSterren's FCO, to play 2.Nf3 irrespective of black's first move. White will avoid an immediate d4 or e4 (or as vanSterren so aptly puts it, white shall avoid taking the emergency exit to the lands of e4 and d4) but shall instead attempt to undermine (!) black's center.

What are your opinions of (1) Using 1.Nc3 as a transpositional tool to the Bird's or King's Gambit and (2) of playing 1.Nc3 independly, as illustrated by the ultimate diagram. Also, how accurate was my analysis?

Please provide feedback and help.

Thanks much!

Please provide feedback. I do need help on this! Thanks much!

I think I played some games against 1. Nc3 otb against a 2000-2100 player and got atleast an even score against it by just playing my normal openings against it.

I wonder why you want to run before you can walk? I mean by this that at our level even the most normal openings like french, queen's gambit, ... provides as much play as you want. We dont have to search it in offbeat openings in which we dont understand the plans behind the moves.

But I will not stop you playing this, what is it called?? The bird opening? I think that 1. Nc3 d5 2. f4 is good for black for the reason that 2. f4 is not really a move that does anything.

Anyway, if you want to try something fun then study the english opening. 

1.Nc3 d5 is definitely the most challenging reply.  White will struggle to get anything:

2.d4 is probably best, which will lead to the Veresov after 2...Nf6 3.Bg5, but Black can try to exploit White's move order by playing 2...Bf5, as White does not have any Qd1-b3 available to attack the weak b7 square.  3.f3 tries to play e2-e4, so Black should play 3...Nf6 where after 4.Bg5 Nbd7 we arrive at a position normally reached from the Veresov, but White has lost the ability to play the Bxf6 variation doubling Black's pawns.

2.e4 dxe4 3.Nxe4 Nd7 gives Black a superior version of the Caro-Kann where a tempo has not been used on ...c6; ...c5 can be played in one move.  Not the most ambitious approach Black has but it's very solid.

2.f4 is ugly.  In the Dutch Defense, ...Nc6 is not an extra move that Black would like to have because it is getting pushed away with d4-d5 and almost never has another good square to go.  After 2...Nf6 White already faces a problem. 3.d3 can be tried to give White's N the square e4, but Black could just play 3...d4 anyway; 4.Ne4 Nxe4 5.dxe4 e5 with a good game.  3.d4 Bf5 is a bad Stonewall.

2.e3 gets played sometimes, with the "point" that 2...e5 3.Qh5 wins material against an inattentive opponent, but Black has nothing to fear after either 3...Qd6 or 3...Nc6 4.Bb5 Qd6.

Abandon 1.Nc3 in any game where you would like to get an advantage with White against a serious player.  1.Nc3 is good for an offbeat position where White can play many legal moves before the game is over.

@logis: Very good point, I probably should stick to mainstream openings. I actually highly enjoy playing the English logis, I play the 1.c4 _ 2.g3 version.  Thanks for the advice, very sound! And you're totally right that f4 is quite inconsistent.

@GreenCastleBlock: Thanks very much for the extremely detailed advice, it was very enlightening. That's so true that d5 seems to be the bane of Nc3, and your variations really helped explain that fact. It seems like the best White can do is enter a Richter-Veresov, which has a slightly dubious reputation. Thanks for all the information!

By the way, would you guys mind answering another question? What is your opinion on the merits of the following line:

Or, more accurately, what are your opinions of the basic idea of 1.Nc3 Any 2.Nf3? Is the idea of ignoring black's first move a sound one?

Thanks for the feedback!

TasmanianTiger

DUMB!!!!!!!

Why would you a "transpositional tool" to an opening if you're not going to state its advantages and disadvantages over the traditional way to get there?  

Just thought it'd be nice to possibly get there a different way? A nice, cool thing to do? I'm looking for a bit of logic here. 

I doubt there is ANY good reason to choose Nc3. 

What is White doing after 1.Nc3 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 ?

3.e4 could transpose to the Tennison Gambit after 3...dxe4 4.Ng5.  Although the Tennison is nothing special for White, Black has better here, I think.  3...Nxe4! 4.Nxe4 dxe4 5.Ng5 e5 6.Nxe4 f5 and I'd take Black.

3.d4 is again a Veresov, where the move Nf3 usually doesn't fit... White often wants to play f2-f3 in order to fight for e4.

White can play a move that does not contest the center like 3.d3, 3.e3, or 3.g3, but in all those cases it is clear Black has the easier position to play and White is playing to equalize.

1Nc3 d5 and the only good move here is 2.e4, and if 2...d4 then Nce2, with the idea of Ng3, Nf3, Bc4, and d3, and we have a 2 knights tango in reverse, which should at least give an interesting position.

Thanks for the answer guys!

@Uhoh: My logic is that I love playing the KG, and 1.Nc3 gives me an oppurtunity to paly the KG in the event of 1.Nc3 e5 2.e4 Nf6 3.f4.

@GreenCastleBlock: Hmmm, I see what you mean. Again I s'pose white can do nothing better than Veresov or e4, Thanks!

@NM Petrosian: Thank you so much for your input National MAster, really appreciate it! I think I've been convinced not to play 1.Nc3 lol!

1Nc3 d5 2.d4 e5! is definetly worth a go, one idea is 3.dxe5 d4 4.Ne4 Qd5, with a very combative position, for example 5.Ng3 h5!? or the simple 5...Nc6.

I see. So Richter-Veresov Attack is probs no good then right?

The Veresov is a fine opening, but you are losing options when you enter it via 1.Nc3.  1.Nc3 is quite an inflexible move.

Well, you have mentioned, Tasmanian, that you like the Kings gambit but are uncomfortable against the Sicilian. So, you wish to play 1.Nc3 as a way to get to the KG/Vienna game, but presumably after 1Nc3 c5, you are not going to play 2.e4. If this is true, then your probable solution is to actually find a method of play vs the Sicilian that you ARE comfortable with, and then your first move can then become 1.e4, thus simplifying everything for you.

Besides, if you like KG positions with lots of action and tactics, then against the Sicilian, play 2. Nf3, 3.d4, on move 4 take back with the Knight, then develop your pieces quickly and attack the hell out of blacks position! How hard is that? ;)

Sorry Roofless, I should have clarified myself lol. I mean I am uncomfortable with Nc3 Sicilians, I actually love playing against the Sicilian (I play the Smith-Morra Gambit). I get the KG quite often with e4, but I was just trying to get it even more often! lol I am KG greedy :)

Groovy. Percentage wise, it seems as though, if you want the KG more often, that you will get what you want via 1.e4 way more often, as 1...e5 is a very popular response, than you would with 1Nc3, where it might be guessed that most players would not go for 1...e5. Most decent players, anyway.

Good point Roofless! Back to 1.e4 and 1.c4 I go ...