14

It sounds like you're a beginner. As such, you should be focusing more on tactics than openings. First, just because they play a move that's not in your book, doesn't mean it's "wrong". It may be an older line that's not in modern opening books, or just not in the books you have. That being said, to answer your question, it depends on the opening. In a ...


11

Your proposal is a plausible way to get to that position. I wouldn't call the Scandinavian "bad" just because it moves a piece twice. It's perfectly playable. When the trap was played in the following game, it was the knight rather than the queen which moved twice. [Site "Sao Paulo (Brazil)"] [Date "1973.??.??"] [White "Nobrega Adaucto Da "] [Black "Barata ...


10

It looks like your position fell apart pretty early on, a symptom of poor opening theory. Your King and Queen were exposed to attack within the first few moves, and White ruthlessly exploited that opportunity. The first move that Stockfish classifies as a blunder (yes, there's more than one) is 5. … h6?? where you attempt to directly attack the advancing ...


8

The sacrifice is quite dubious. Besides the answers with 10.Nxe5, 10. Rxe5 is simply two knights for a rook and there is no attack for Black.


8

[fen "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1 "] 1. e4 b6 2. d4 Bb7 3. Bd3 f5 4. exf5 Bxg2 5. Qh5+ g6 6. fxg6 Nf6 7. gxh7+ Nxh5 8. Bg6++ One possible trap for black is in the Matinovsky gambit which starts with ... 3.f5.


7

In essence this is why databases are used. No book has room for such data. Basically if someone leaves your preparation, you need to pause and ask "what is wrong with that move", or when studying lines ask yourself "what about x". Of course the more you know the less you have to think over the board -- so yes, study the refutations to inferior replies, etc....


6

Nothing is ever certain, but when you are in position that was played in thousand of high class games, any deviation is virtually always dubious move. On the other hand in position which was played in lets say just 10 high class games, novelty is still more probably to be dubious, but it is nowhere close to be certain. Also there can be more equally strong ...


5

Owen's Defense is a bit passive, but quite solid opening, so there aren't that many traps to watch out for. Here is a primitive one: [FEN ""] [Title "Owen's Defense"] [Startply "5"] 1. e4 b6 2. Nf3 Bb7 3. Bc4?! Bxe4? (3... e6) 4. Bxf7+ Kxf7 5. Ng5+ Ke8 6. Nxe4 Black has lost their castling rights, so there must be some advantage for white. 3. Bc4 isn't ...


5

This is really a question for the engines, but it's hard to believe that Black has enough compensation here for his creatively sacrificed material. White could also return a fraction of the material with 10 Nxe5!? dxe4 11 Nxc6 Qd6 12 Nxe7+ Qxe7 13 d4 and be just up B+N for R; or return a bit more material in your main line with 12 Qh5 followed by 13 Nc6!? ...


4

[FEN ""] 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qd8 Above is a playable line of the Scandinavian defense. 3...Qa5 and maybe also 3...Qd6 are more popular, but Qd8 isn't horrible. The tactical trick itself is more general. It can occur, for example, in the following gambit line: [FEN ""] 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 dxe4 4.f3 exf3 5.Nf3 Nf6 6.Bc4 Bg4


4

There is a saying that "the best way to refute a gambit is to accept it", attributed to Steinitz. While sayings in chess often have exceptions, I think it does apply to this particular case. If you go by either the Stockfish evaluation (-0.8) or the results of games between highly rated players (67% win for black out of 12 games), the gambit is a mistake. ...


4

Because it is a game and a contest/struggle. The opponent makes moves that are good for him not the moves in the favorite line you memorized. Stop figuring out why his move is 'wrong' and figure out what your best move and plan is and then do that. Chances are that his move is quite good even if not the theoretical best. You do not keep making your ...


4

I'm an FM so I guess I'm experienced. For Black's POV, the 12...e6 variation you gave is the best way to play. It pretty much stops White's attack and Black's just up a piece. If he really wanted to Black could have also gone for 11...Ke8 followed by ...e6. In any case, playing with ...e6 is the way to go since it covers up all Black's weak light squares. ...


3

I think you know that 12..e6 for Black avoids all trouble and thus he was never in trouble until the successive blunders. So your Bxf7 sac is completely dubious. Your problem is back at move 3 when you played Qxd4 and lost time to Nc6. At this point Black is already doing well. Based on your play you might consider 3.c3 offering the Smith-Morra Gambit....


3

I would actually call this a trap that loses black his ability to castle. I would call it a double blunder, first by white with 5. Bc4 then by black with 5. ... Nxe4. Is there a name for this? It is unusual for blunders to be given names although it does happen in special cases. This isn't special. Is there any counter to this variation? ... Qa5+ ...


3

As other already pointed out, black doesn't have enough compensation and white can even give back some material to have an easy game. But even in the last line where you keep the material and black plays Ne5, you can play d3 to free yourself up, and black cant really capture that pawn, at least not right away due to: [FEN "r1bq1rk1/2p1bppp/p7/1p1pn3/3Np3/...


3

Let's face it (and this is not being mean), both players are beginner chess players and are naturally making lots of mistakes. For instance 7....Qa5+ would win the knight on e5. Also black had a forced mate starting with 14. ... Rxf2+ (with the idea to remove the pawn first which could intercept bishop checks) but chose to win the queen instead. Of course ...


3

Well, to be honest, it's not a very good opening by either of the players. While you haven't made any real mistakes, there were chances for black to seize the initiative. In The French defence, you hardly see black taking the initiative. Black always hopes to sit tightly and looks for counter attack, usually on the queenside. i am not a huge fan of your ...


3

Is it best for me to stop and eat clock time figuring out why the wrong move is wrong? No, you should learn before the match what the responses to deviations are. If you don't know why deviations are "wrong" and how to punish them, then you don't really know the opening.


3

I hope you are talking about the below line . " 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.d4 exd4 5.0-0 Bc5 6.e5 " The Best response to the above line from Black is 6) ..d5! . 7.exf6 dxc4 8.Re1+ Be6 9.Ng5 Qd5 (9...Qxf6?? 10.Nxe6 fxe6 11.Qh5+ followed by 12.Qxc5 is a notorious trap) 10.Nc3 Qf5 (10...dxc3?? 11.Qxd5 wins, since 11...Bxd5 is illegal) 11.Nce4 0-0-0 with ...


2

Is there a list of ALL potential mates/traps under 10 moves or so? "No" is the obvious answer if you do the maths regarding just how many there could potentially (to use your word) be. Starting with all 32 pieces on the board the possible number of positions in the first 10 moves is mind-boggling.


2

Pandolfini wrote at least one book titled "Chess Openings, Traps and Zaps". In addition, there are numerous books of miniatures, which are, in some cases, traps.


2

"Magnus" often plays moves that are good if played against a worse player... Does black's opening here have any advantages against a beginner or is it simply bad? Is black just "hoping" white will forget about the queen and move the bishop (or some other blunder I'm not seeing)? I would not think in terms of: moves that are good against beginners, etc ...


1

I think black is totally lost here, after d5, Nxe5 seems to be winning easily for white. Even in your position, after f4 and Nc6 and taking on e7, white seems to be up a piece for no compensation.


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible