My best game today : positional queen sacrifice

@hatchet #20

Yes, indeed!
In one of the comments by this article of GM Serper, a player asked about Bc8, and got a "white wins with traditional g2g4 breakthrough", which I found hard to believe.

www.chess.com/article/view/the-craziest-king-moves-ever?ncc=2#first_new_comment

That player now replied, quoting a line from GM Williams.

""The idea is that 31. ...Bc8 32. g4!! hxg4 33. Ng5! Bxd7 34. h5 crushes Black. As pointed out by GM Williams in his video on the Short-Timman -game.""

#16 Well, then give some concrete lines to prove your bizarre claim, that "the Scandinavian has been, basicly, disproved" or just say "i dont like it". Im fine with that. I respect opinions, not lies. Otherwise shut up.

The Scandinavian has not been disproved.

An example:

1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qa5 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.d4 c6 6.Bc4 Bg4 7.h3 Bxf3

This is perfectly playable for black. White gets a .3 kind of advantage due to his bishops for like 10-20 moves, but black has no bad pieces, no weaknesses and he prepares ..c5. His Knight controls d5, his Bishop goes to d6 or e7. Blacks rooks are well placed on e8 and d8. His Queen goes to b6 or c7. He usually 0-0s. Sometimes he operates with ..b5 and/or ..a5 but his main idea is ..c5 (if possible, without allowing white to answer d4-d5). As soon as black was able to play ..c5 whites advantage usually disapears. This is basically the same way how black plays in many Caro Kann main lines with with dxe4. And it has some similarities with how black plays in Rubinstein French (there he puts his bishop on b7). And this is one of the main black strategies against 1.d4 d5 2.c4. "Develop and play c5" (W. Kramnik)

@Stratic; #22.

Shut up? I have lived in a dictatorship and you are not going to impose yours; I will talk whatever I want, like everyone here; If you any complex with your chess, it is not my problem; even talking about chess, you will never be a titled player and will never have the profiency of a master, or at least, a respectful person.

One thing is that it could be playable, another thing would be if will give any chance to win.

The Scandinavian has been disproved as a minor defence and as a psychological tool against opening preparation.

Telling someone who spreads lies to shut up is not dictatorship.

It is common sense.

Now let me again postulate the truth:

The scandinavian is an unrefuted, sane main line.

The Centre counter as I know it by is a decent opening. In my personal opinion I think it is jank but it does not represent what I want to do opening the game. It is a fair try and should not be considered disproven. Unless you from white can beat Magnus Carlsen (playing it from black) 100% of the time. It is quite different but playable from what I know.

"Spreading lies"; I am still waiting you get your master title to demostrate your knowledge.

It is not common sense. You are just defending a ghost; try to play it OTB. Have you ever played OTB? Who you are? Do you have a FIDE rating?

It is a bad defence and in a long term it is basicly destroyed as being a minor defence.

1. It goes against every chess rule of development.
a) You have to move your queen many times favoring the development of your opponent.
b) While your opponent gets a very interesting opening, you just limitate yourself to control a file or making your queen passive.
c) Black gets passive and closed.
d) It has been crushed many times and by statistics:
d.1) In the masterful games, those who played it lost more games than winning with it.
d.2) It is, as said, just used as a psychological weapon instead of as a serious defence.

http://chesstempo.com/gamedb/game/1754521/rnb1kb1r/pp2pppp/2p2n2/q7/3P4/2N2N2/PPP2PPP/R1BQKB1R%20w%20KQkq%20-%202%206

http://chesstempo.com/gamedb/game/1754521/rnb1kb1r/pp2pppp/2p2n2/q7/3P4/2N2N2/PPP2PPP/R1BQKB1R%20w%20KQkq%20-%202%206

http://chesstempo.com/gamedb/game/1763372/rn2kb1r/ppp1pppp/3q1n2/8/3P2b1/2N2N2/PPP2PPP/R1BQKB1R%20w%20KQkq%20-%203%206

http://chesstempo.com/gamedb/game/3214362/rnb1kb1r/pp2pppp/2pq1n2/8/3P4/2N2N2/PPP2PPP/R1BQKB1R%20w%20KQkq%20-%200%206

Well done @achja ! Everything works against weak opponents!
My proof:
http://en.lichess.org/uD4E7B8ISavy
http://en.lichess.org/CYEcRwgP0S6C
Even bad openings such as 1. h4 and 1. g4 are good enough.
Now, for challenge, try this queen sac in blitz against 2500+ rated player. When you win, please post it here. Thank you!

Hello buddies ... can we stop with name calling and mud throwing, and communicate in a friendly and constructive way ? After all we are all humans, with a shared love for the game of chess, isn't it ? :)

Regarding Scandinavian defense :
GM Tiviakov, a rather strong and solid GM, has been playing the Scandinavian defense (Qd6 line) as black since many years.

In the last few years he suffered serious losses with it against GM Shirov and GM Motylev, after which Tiviakov made a switch to the French Rubinstein variation, which is a line which GM Dzindzi (yes, the one with the long and not so easy name) seemed to have called a win for white.
Later on I saw that Tiviakov was playing the Scandi again in a few games.

Interesting to know perhaps is what GM Smirnov had to say about it :
http://www.expert-chess-strategies.com/chess-games.html

- being quote -
""As Black you got to know the Scandinavian well to survive. You have to study typical middle game positions and techniques.

If I would play the Scandinavian I would specialize on the Wahls setup (Qa5 and Bf5). I have played it for many years. This opening is pretty tough to beat, but you have to know it well. I suggest that you use it just as a surprise weapon.

But I will not recommend the Scandinavian to you, as I don't want, that you waste a lot of time learning and playing an inferior opening system, like I did. White is scoring very well in the Scandinavian and this opening is not played in top level chess. Play the Sicilian or play 1...e5 instead.""
- end quote -

@Tangelo777 #27

I am sharing this queen sac game hoping to inspire others to play creative chess in their games.
The queen sac in this game was winning, and would be winning against 2500+ as well. Therefore I fail to see the point you are trying to make here.

@achja have you ever beat a 2500+ rated player in standard chess or any variant playing under any time control? I hope you don't filter out strong opponents in your seeks.