Thoughts on 1.Nc3

It's not a Grandmaster opening of course, although Morozovic did once play it against Kasparov. However I believe that it's excellent for the average to good club player - i.e. the majority.

I think that many club players make the mistake of trying to play Grandmaster openings without really understanding them, and suffer in their results because of this.

There are a number of advantages to playing 1.Nc3 :-

1) It's obvious perfectly sound and sensible - unlike some other attempts to get off the beaten path like 1.g4. It develops a piece towards the centre, and 1...d5 is by no means any sort of refutation. How can it be on move 1? 

2) Tactically it can be very tricky for an unprepared Black player. Also there are some important strategic themes that he or she needs to understand.

3) Despite this, few players bother preparing anything against it. Learning and getting experience of this opening will therefore put the White player at a considerable advantage. No need to test who knows the most up to date developments on the Najdorf, Slav etc. And on that point, how many club players with their busy lives away from chess have the time to learn what they really ought to if they are to play an opening like that? 

4) Psychological it's a good weapon. Some Black players have it in their head that it must be bad, and will therefore go all out to 'refute' it - often with disasterous consequences.

5) It's a surprise. It takes people out of their comfort zone on move 1.

All in all a good opening for those who would rather get away from the herd and prey on it, rather than be a part of it. Lots of fun too.

The most interesting line to me is 1.Nc3 d5 2.Nf3 as a lot of engines seem to like playing it for some reason. 

@TitanCG I'm sure that's perfectly playable, and certainly very provocative. Personally I prefer to go directly with 2.e4 against 1..d5 . I think 2.Nf3 can be a useful waiting move against a Black response like 1...Nf6 - just waiting to see how he or she sets up.

Draw as hell.

@NewArdweaden. Perhaps you could enlighten us with your evidence?

Unfortunately I cannot; I misunderstood. I thought 1.Nf3 was the one discussed opening. I am deeply sorry to have upset you.

You didn't upset me. I takes rather more than that. No need to be sorry - deeply or otherwise. Just be careful when you're around 1.Nf3 fans. You'll have a job of persuading them that the wonderful game of chess becomes a stone-cold draw due to one sensible-looking knight move on move one.

Perhaps you should take a look of pretty much every comment posted here with a distance - especially at some kind of semi-trollish that I post.

However, among strong GMs 1.Nf3 as white is normally used when playing for a draw, as far as I know. 

@FirebrandX. Transpotition to other openings hardly suffices as a refutation. And I don't agree White has to go 3.d4 after 2...Nf6

Would anyone like to join me for a tournament here :- http://www.chess.com/tournament/1nc3-madness

1. Nc3!

Brilliant move!

LOL Thanks millionairesdaughter. If only it were that simple. :)

rraayynnyyaanngg

it was my repertoire the last year.  

I w0n a quickly game in a slow game  with a inportant trap, against the e6 sicilian players

its very transpositional, can become a KIA, Ruy Lopez, QG

its a great opening with surprise value and independent character. i dont know why you think its not "worthy" of grandmasters, especially with so many easy transpositions to established systems. even some correspondence GM's have specialized in it.

for the most part , you DONT need to tranpose (many people think that's its only purpose), but agaisnt some black responses you might be better learning a transposition of choice instead of trying to be 100% of the beaten path.

for example 1.nc3 nf6, and white pretty much has to play some version of e4 or d4 or go into some sort of KIA like formation. luckily you can pick from many fine choices, like vienna gambit, g3 vienna,three nights game, veserov, jobava attack, etc, which are not fully mainstream but not super uncommon either.

or 1.nc3 c5 2.nf3 (2.d4!? is interesting though) 2.nc6 and you are pretty much back to transposing. 

I mean, I guess the question is ... what are you trying to accomplish with 1.Nc3?

It's not a particularly interesting or useful move on it's own - you often want your c-pawn on c3 or c4 - so it really depends what scheme of development you're aiming for. On it's own it's just not that interesting a move and clearly less logical than 1.e4, 1.d4, or 1.Nf3. 

Just about anything is playable. What are you trying to accomplish? 

The purpose of 1.Nc3 is to get black to make committal pawn moves like 1...d5 or 1...c5. Hence it's not so effective if black plays 1.Nc3 Nf6, avoiding moving any pawns.