Timeline for Countering the Horowitz Defense
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 7, 2020 at 2:14 | answer | added | user24344 | timeline score: 0 | |
| Jul 26, 2018 at 10:03 | comment | added | Pijotrek |
I was not familiar with 'Horowitz-Defense' what made me read this post. After I saw the full line which is 1. d4 e6 I was pretty sure you missed most of the variation, haha! Personally I don't really like it, what kind of analysis can we do at move 2? As a beginner you should.n't really be concerned about openings that much. Anyway you got a very nice answer from Evergalo below
|
|
| Sep 26, 2017 at 14:25 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackChess/status/912684517885923331 | ||
| Sep 22, 2017 at 13:28 | vote | accept | CommunityBot | ||
| Sep 22, 2017 at 11:34 | answer | added | Brian Towers♦ | timeline score: 2 | |
| Sep 22, 2017 at 9:26 | answer | added | Evargalo | timeline score: 11 | |
| Sep 22, 2017 at 7:04 | comment | added | Philip Roe | Both sides have made one simple and useful developing move. Any further simple and useful moves will keep the game in known terrritory.. There is a wide choice, apart from 2. c4. For example 2.e4, 2.Nf3, 2. Nc3, 2. g3, 2.e3. 2.f4, 3. Bf4,etc. Basically Black is letting you play almost whatever you want to play. | |
| Sep 22, 2017 at 5:58 | comment | added | Glorfindel♦ | Related question from Black’s POV. | |
| Sep 22, 2017 at 5:06 | history | asked | user14142 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |