Because it's annoying?? LOL
Why are people annoyed by Scandinavian Defence?
Sort:
When I learned to play (in the 1980's) it was considered a beginner's mistake. When I came back to competitive play (around 2014) I was taken aback that it had become a valid opening. I still have trouble taking it seriously as a result.
Apr 10, 2018
0
#5
The same reason they hate the London System: it is difficult to sidestep and gives a solid position, with no obvious weaknesses to attack.
Beginners hate playing it as white because they make the mistake of trying to protect the e pawn rather than accept the gambit. Scandinavian is not a defense I would remotely suggest beginners try to play. Even as an experienced amateur, I don't feel comfortable playing it. It violates generally opening principle to gain initiative. Because of this, it is easy to lose tempo or even lose material if the black player isn't careful.
When i first started playing chess it was considered a bad opening and few good players played that opening.
I wrote a book about that opening and gave new theory and won many games from masters and higher. And then more books came out and the opening was considered respectable. Even Anand sometimes played it as Black. [he once got a winning position as Black vs Kasparov using that opening in a World Championship Match]
It breaks one of the fundamental rules of chess [not to develop your queen early in the opening]. So some players are unhappy if they cannot refute the Scandinavian.
Not to worry, after all these years, i think it probably can be refuted! 
After 2...Qxd5, as a Scandinavian player myself, to me 3 Nf3 is the most annoying move. It does not put the Knight on c3 in front of the c2 pawn and keeps c4 in the works. I suspect many Scandinavian players breath a sigh of relief when they see 3 Nc3. Because of 3 Nf3 I have tinkered some with playing Smerdon's Scandinavian (he uses 2...Nf6) but some of the lines are out of my style zone (though I continue to be fascinated by his very good book). But even in his book Black can find himself uncomfortably facing the pawn duo d4 c4.
Play 2. d4 and transpose to the Blackmar-Diemer if you want to throw them for a loop. Many Scandinavian players won't be prepared to play a Blackmar Gambit.
Apr 11, 2018
0
#11
Apr 11, 2018
0
#12
I am in 2nd grade and my coach suggested I switch to the Scandi late in first grade. Many kids like to look for sharp tactics when you play e4 e5, or the Sicilian against them. But those lines take up time to learn. With the Scandinavian I don't need to spend much time on openings as black until I am older and better rated. If you know what you are doing, you end up with a comfortable game against kids in the 1300 - 1500 range. My opponents think it is annoying because they have no real plan to attack it. Also, because it is seldom played by them, I often am more aware of tactis coming out of the opening than they are. My coach suggests at 1700 or so we will explore other openings that fit my strengths at that time.
Apr 11, 2018
0
#13
omsaibalkawade wrote:
play 2.Nf3 tennison gambit
2.dxe4 3.Ng5 e5 4.Nxe4 f5 nice for black.
nbd2010 makes a good point
just the simple fact that the scandi is like a reversal in wrestling where white (having advantage of initiative and what not) now has to respond to black on move 2 and black is probably more familiar with the territory at least at lower levels and probably higher
just the simple fact that the scandi is like a reversal in wrestling where white (having advantage of initiative and what not) now has to respond to black on move 2 and black is probably more familiar with the territory at least at lower levels and probably higher
if it makes people annoyed, then it is a good defense. just like other people being annoyed of encountering the French defense exchange variation. well, that's life! or should I say, that's chess!
Apr 15, 2018
0
#17
I'm just annoyed it's now called the Scandinavian Opening. The old name, the Center Counter Game, is a better description.
People are annoyed because they see it as an opening mistake that they think they should be able to defeat with proper technique. When that doesn't work or they find their understanding of opening theory isn't superb, they get annoyed.
Nobody mentionned the real reason many are annoyed by scandinavian :
the important thing is that black (your opponent) chooses the structure he wants, and u cannot avoid it.
So black brings u on his/her field, and u have to be ready because scandinavian can be straightforward, especially if white plays carelessly.
Moreover, most don't like to "lose" their beloved e pawn, while pushing it (and protecting it unless u like to play 1.Nc3) is just wrong...
Apr 16, 2018
0
#19
poucin wrote:
Nobody mentionned the real reason many are annoyed by scandinavian :
the important thing is that black (your opponent) chooses the structure he wants, and u cannot avoid it.
So black brings u on his/her field, and u have to be ready because scandinavian can be straightforward, especially if white plays carelessly.
Moreover, most don't like to "lose" their beloved e pawn, while pushing it (and protecting it unless u like to play 1.Nc3) is just wrong...
I don't get it. The Scandinavian isn't annoying at all. It's much more difficult to get something against the french defense. The scandinavian is a good opening but many players who play this opening are bad because they just memorize the setup and after that they blunder pieces left and right.
Apr 16, 2018
0
#20
pfren wrote:
Smositional έγραψε:
poucin wrote:
Nobody mentionned the real reason many are annoyed by scandinavian :
the important thing is that black (your opponent) chooses the structure he wants, and u cannot avoid it.
So black brings u on his/her field, and u have to be ready because scandinavian can be straightforward, especially if white plays carelessly.
Moreover, most don't like to "lose" their beloved e pawn, while pushing it (and protecting it unless u like to play 1.Nc3) is just wrong...
I don't get it. The Scandinavian isn't annoying at all. It's much more difficult to get something against the french defense. The scandinavian is a good opening but many players who play this opening are bad because they just memorize the setup and after that they blunder pieces left and right.
It's obvious that you don't get it- at all.
The best book on the Scandinavian (by M. Wahls, K. Mueller and H. Langrock) is about plans and structures in all of his 370 pages, and does not present a single line of theory to memorize!
It's obvious that you can't read at all. I wasn't talking about theory. I was talking about the players who just memorize the general piece placement like in the london system. They don't really understand the opening. I'm not talking about GMs here. Both the Londonsystem and the scandinavian are decent openings.
Why are people annoyed by Scandinavian Defence?