Talk:Nimzowitsch Defence

Latest comment: 9 months ago by 2A00:23C7:548F:C01:52A4:BE26:845B:5A8 in topic Clarification

Clarification

edit

3.exd5 Qxd5, followed by either 4.Nf3, seeking to gain time by attacking the queen with Nc3, but enabling Black to put pressure on White's centre with 4...Bg4 or 4...e5.

I'm finding this sentence hard to grasp — feels like it should be "seeking to gain time _before_ attacking the queen" or perhaps "_then_ seeking to gain time by attacking the queen"? cf. this edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nimzowitsch_Defence&diff=next&oldid=164498084.

As a novice player, I'd like a second opinion before making the edit, though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robert.sinton (talkcontribs) 23:05, 9 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

If 4. Nc3 Black plays Qxd4 winning a pawn. So White defends it with 4. Nf3, *then* gains time by attacking the queen with 5. Nc3. 2A00:23C7:548F:C01:52A4:BE26:845B:5A8 (talk) 17:05, 2 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Misplaced content

edit

Some of this stuff does not directly relate to the N. Defence and should me moved or merged to hypermodernism (chess). ---user:sonjaaa

Gates-Carlsen

edit

Magnus Carlsen played 2...d5?! against Gates, not the solid and transpositional 2...e5, as the article erroneously states. http://www.businessinsider.com/bill-gates-magnus-carlsen-chess-match-2014-1 Krakatoa (talk) 17:16, 27 December 2016 (UTC)Reply