Talk:Nimzowitsch Defence

Clarification
"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 (talk • contribs) 23:05, 9 April 2021 (UTC)


 * 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)

Misplaced content
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
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)