It started when recently I looked into the Center Game and I began liking the early d4 push. I started studying and settled with the:

Center Game/Accepted/Paulsen Attack
1. e4 e5 2. d4 exd4 3. Qxd4 Nc6 4. Qe3

I played with it a few times and have done well. What are your thoughts on the Center Game?

Also, I looked into the d4 push with the Sicilian. I feel nervous about the Sicilian sometimes and I wondered if the d4 push right away could improve my chances from what I normally use.

I looked at the Morra Gambit and lacking experience I have some questions. Is being down the pawn a problem or can white easily regain it or get a big attack? Also, what if black defends turn two with something like b6 or e6? Or if instead of c3 and going gambit you go Qxd4 turn three?

If not the gambit then what else could I play considering I don't want to go into things like the Dragon setup and such?

I can't comment on the Center Game, but I do know the Smith-Morra Gambit.

First, don't worry about black not taking the d4 pawn immediately. Anyone playing the Sicilian who doesn't take it clearly doesn't understand even the slightest thing about the Sicilian. If they're that clueless, just play natural moves to develop towards the center, and don't worry about specific opening variations.

As for the gambit itself, it actually gets declined about half the time, so you won't always end up down a pawn. After 3. c3, if they don't play 3. ... dxc3, you just play 4. cxd4, and you've got a nice pair of pawns in the center. Go from there.

If they do accept the gambit, you're not going to just get the pawn back at any point. You'll have a nice developmental lead, due not only to the pawn on e4 and knight on c3, but also the wide open attacking lanes for your queen and both bishops, while your opponents bishops are still blocked in by pawns. All that by move 4!

Your goal is to try and create a serious attack, but you do have to understand at least the basic layout and ideas of the opening to use your lead in development properly. This stuff isn't for the weak of heart - you often end up sacrificing much more than just the pawn to get an attack. I've given up a knight or bishop for my attack in this opening several times, and those are the games that go well! Actually, it's when I don't see an opportunity to sac for the attack that I usually end up losing in this gambit.

I highly recommend "The Modern Morra Gambit" by Hannes Langrock for learning the basics of this opening. The introduction chapter shows you the basic layout, then goes into the typical middle game attacks that come from it. Once you've read the intro, you're ready to start playing it, and you never have to read the rest of the book! Just use the additional chapters to look up specific lines as they come up in your own games, and learn a little bit at a time. I really like the layout of this book and wish all opening books were written like that.

Honestly, I think the Smith-Morra is a great anti-Sicilian line for developing players. It might not be sound enough for grandmaster play (though it might be - that's an ongoing debate), but us patzers can learn a lot about attacking by playing this type of opening.

--Fromper

In the Center Game black should capture right away, period. Yes, you could play 2. ... Nc6 and get into a variation of the Nimzowitsch Defense (not recommended) or step into the Philidor Defense with 2. ... d6 (if white doesn't opt for dxe5 instead, and not recommended either).

I don't think 2. d4 is the way to go, unless you wan't to get into the Danish (which is okay). The Center Game is just the Scandinavian a move up and all you're going to get out of that is an equal game, while not making it very hard for black at all.

My recipe for black:
1. e4 e5 2. d4 exd4 3. Qxd4 Nc6 4. Qe3 Nf6 5. e5 Ng4 6. Qe4 d5 7. exd6+ Be6 8. dxc7 Qxc7 9. Nc3 Bb4
And I'm happy. Attempts with 5. Nc3 and 5. Bd2 aren't much better for white, for the latter there's a London-Liverpool correspondence game somewhere with that line.

3. Qxd4 (preventing the Smith-Morra) in the Sicilian you describe is just bad. 3. ... Nc6 and black has gained a move and is now equal. In the Chekhover, starting with 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Qxd4, the queen capture is a good idea, because after 4. ... Nc6 the queen can stay there for a bit 5. Bb5 Bd7 6. Bxc6 etc, but I digress.
The Smith-Morra is a valid anti-Sicilian and easy enough for amateurs to play, just ask anyone here.

I think what he's trying to say is that if black just declines, then you take back cxd4 and have a nice pawn center.

That's the real question, now, isn't it? This is, in fact, the very question asked by the gambit. Is it worth it? I think so ... others disagree. And that's what makes chess interesting.

1.e4 c5 2.d4 b6? 3.dxc5 bxc5 4.Qxd5 wins a pawn because of the double attack on a8 and c5.

2. ... e6? 3.Nf3 and now cd 4.c3 and you're back in the Morra. Does black have other good third moves?

This is just bad after Nc6.

I am new to chess, and i found this forum is a very good place to visit and learn some good ideas, tips, chess. I am really happy and will spread my word to my friends to get some good stuff.

Thanks for every one and good luck

Welcome!!

(sorry to misdirect this thread - continue with scheduled programming )

Well, I have been playing games online and so far I have had great success with the Center Game I am thinking it will become my main opening for white.

However, I can't find anyone who plays the Sicilian . As soon as I find someone I am going to try the gambit. Until then or incase I don't like the gambit, I am looking into the Chekhover Sicilian, noting that white can get a similar structure after 2...Nc6 3. Bb5 also. I feel that the Chekhover fits my style as it too has early Queen development similar to other openings I play including the Center Game.

In the Chekhover, after black recaptures the Bishop, there are three moves for white that seem popular, Nc3, 0-0, and c4. What are your opinions on these continuations?

I think I once saw it used against Lasker...guess what... Lasker won