Answers.Body: <p>Chess strategy is complex and has several ingredients mingling at the same time. It is true that 3 c3 helps white mantaining two center pawns <em>if black decides for a c:d4 pawn exchange</em>. But black isn't forced to that and the move c3 has some incovenients. To list just two:</p>
  <ul>
  <li><p>blocks the c3 square which is the natural place for developing the Q-side knight;</p>
  </li>
  <li><p>gives up the idea of attacking black's center with the move c4.</p>
  </li>
  </ul>
  <p>The move 3 e3 on the other hand helps white development since it opens the way out for the K-side bishop.</p>
  <p>Moreover, the loss of one centre pawn is balanced by the fact that after white will castle K-side the absence of the e pawn will make the e-file a natural place for a white rook which will play an important role in the fight over the e5 square.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-07-06T14:22:43.777Z
Answers.Text: From a strategic point of view, I would add to this that after 3. e3 cxd4 4. c3 white's position is open for the bishop and the queen to launch an attack on black's kingside while black's position is more pointing on white's queenside. That should be a smaller threat for white after castle kingside.
Answers.UserDisplayName: maxmitz
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-07-05T08:54:03.310Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2021-07-05T08:54:03.310Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Andrea Mori
Answers.Body: <p>Move 3 is a bit early for such positional evaluations, but some food for thoughts:</p>
  <ul>
  <li><p>after 3...cd 4.ed, e7-e6 will be played, rather sooner than later but then the pawn structure in the center is fixed, which makes it hard for Black to &quot;exploit&quot; his extra central pawn. Any expansion with ...f6 and ...e5 is out of question for at least the next 20 moves because of White control over e5 (Pd4, Nf3, Bf4, Re1...); even if it somehow becomes possible, it is not sure to be desirable at all.</p>
  </li>
  <li><p>For the sake of controlling the center, White's c-pawn is not much worse than Black's e-pawn. Indeed, while Black cannot hope for ...e5, White may change the pawn structure with c2-c4 at some point, heading for an isolani.</p>
  </li>
  <li><p>Beside pawns, the center is also useful for pieces. White chances of occupying the e5-vanguard position with a knight are much better than Black's chances of occupying e4 because of the semi-open e-file.</p>
  </li>
  <li><p>Since she has a tiny advance is development, White often tries to select non-symmetrical pawn structures, so the exchange Caro-Kann structure with 3.e3 cd 4.ed might be more attractive for most players than the exchange Slav structure with 3.c3 cd 4.cd.</p>
  </li>
  </ul>
  <p>All that being said, 3.c3 is a decent move that some players would prefer over 3.e3. And in both cases, Black is not at all forced to release the tension by 3...cd.</p>
  <p>And by the way, 3.e4 is a whole different story.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-07-05T08:43:10.823Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2021-07-06T11:46:02.100Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2021-07-06T11:46:02.100Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Evargalo
Answers.Body: <p>The number of central pawns is one of the factor that matter in the evaluation of a position, but it's definitely not the only one.</p>
  <p>While I think both <strong>3.e3</strong> and <strong>3.c3</strong> are playable, 3.e3 helps your development, while <strong>3.c3</strong> does not. If Black takes on d4, White gets an amazing outpost on the e5 square. In fact, Black would wish he could put his e6 pawn on the &quot;c&quot; file instead so that it could fight for the control of e5 and get a similar outpost on e4.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-07-05T10:45:18.220Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2021-07-05T10:45:18.220Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: David
Answers.Body: <p>Just a small addendum: As a Bf4 player who never plays London but his own obscure systems (which are extremely dangerous for both sides - in the days before computer preparation, I clobbered a few GMs with them I only play e3. My own experience is that the most doubly-edged Black plan is pestering b2 with his queen. e3 (developing, also keeping the option Nc3, eat b2 and die!) is asking for it. After c3, you can wuss out by answering Qb6 with Qb3, but that is extremely drawish. Oh, and immediate cxd4 gives White a nice outpost on e5.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-07-06T11:14:19.137Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2021-07-06T11:14:19.137Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Hauke Reddmann
Body: <p>So center pawns are usually regarded as more powerful than side pawns, which is why I have a question about this position.</p>
  <p>After <code>1. d4 d5 2. Bf4 c5</code> the engine and theory recommend playing <code>3. e3</code> to defend the pawn on d4, but if black exchanges for the pawn on d4, doesn't black end up with two center pawns and white end up with one because they exchanged the side c-pawn for the center d-pawn?</p>
  <pre><code> [FEN &quot; &quot;]
   [StartPly &quot;5&quot;]
   1. d4 d5 2. Bf4 c5 3. e3
  </code></pre>
  <p>Wouldn't it be better to play <code>3. c3</code> so you can keep the center pawns?</p>
  <pre><code> [FEN &quot; &quot;]
   [StartPly &quot;5&quot;]
   1. d4 d5 2. Bf4 c5 3. c3
  </code></pre>
  
Tags: <opening><pawns><pawn-structure><1.d4><london-system>
Title: Why are side pawns better than center pawns in this position?
ThreadText: # Why are side pawns better than center pawns in this position?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2021-07-05)
  
  So center pawns are usually regarded as more powerful than side pawns, which is why I have a question about this position.
  After 1. d4 d5 2. Bf4 c5 the engine and theory recommend playing 3. e3 to defend the pawn on d4, but if black exchanges for the pawn on d4, doesn't black end up with two center pawns and white end up with one because they exchanged the side c-pawn for the center d-pawn?
   [FEN " "]
   [StartPly "5"]
   1. d4 d5 2. Bf4 c5 3. e3
  
  Wouldn't it be better to play 3. c3 so you can keep the center pawns?
   [FEN " "]
   [StartPly "5"]
   1. d4 d5 2. Bf4 c5 3. c3
  
  **Tags:** opening, pawns, pawn-structure, 1.d4, london-system
  
  
  ---
  
  ## 4 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_1 on 2021-07-05. Score: 17
  
  Chess strategy is complex and has several ingredients mingling at the same time. It is true that 3 c3 helps white mantaining two center pawns *if black decides for a c:d4 pawn exchange*. But black isn't forced to that and the move c3 has some incovenients. To list just two:
  
  * blocks the c3 square which is the natural place for developing the Q-side knight;
  * gives up the idea of attacking black's center with the move c4.
  
  The move 3 e3 on the other hand helps white development since it opens the way out for the K-side bishop.
  
  Moreover, the loss of one centre pawn is balanced by the fact that after white will castle K-side the absence of the e pawn will make the e-file a natural place for a white rook which will play an important role in the fight over the e5 square.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_2**: From a strategic point of view, I would add to this that after 3. e3 cxd4 4. c3 white's position is open for the bishop and the queen to launch an attack on black's kingside while black's position is more pointing on white's queenside. That should be a smaller threat for white after castle kingside.  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_3 on 2021-07-05. Score: 5
  
  Move 3 is a bit early for such positional evaluations, but some food for thoughts:
  
  * after 3...cd 4.ed, e7-e6 will be played, rather sooner than later but then the pawn structure in the center is fixed, which makes it hard for Black to "exploit" his extra central pawn. Any expansion with ...f6 and ...e5 is out of question for at least the next 20 moves because of White control over e5 (Pd4, Nf3, Bf4, Re1...); even if it somehow becomes possible, it is not sure to be desirable at all.
  * For the sake of controlling the center, White's c-pawn is not much worse than Black's e-pawn. Indeed, while Black cannot hope for ...e5, White may change the pawn structure with c2-c4 at some point, heading for an isolani.
  * Beside pawns, the center is also useful for pieces. White chances of occupying the e5-vanguard position with a knight are much better than Black's chances of occupying e4 because of the semi-open e-file.
  * Since she has a tiny advance is development, White often tries to select non-symmetrical pawn structures, so the exchange Caro-Kann structure with 3.e3 cd 4.ed might be more attractive for most players than the exchange Slav structure with 3.c3 cd 4.cd.
  
  All that being said, 3.c3 is a decent move that some players would prefer over 3.e3. And in both cases, Black is not at all forced to release the tension by 3...cd.
  
  And by the way, 3.e4 is a whole different story.
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_4 on 2021-07-05. Score: 3
  
  The number of central pawns is one of the factor that matter in the evaluation of a position, but it's definitely not the only one.
  
  While I think both **3.e3** and **3.c3** are playable, 3.e3 helps your development, while **3.c3** does not. If Black takes on d4, White gets an amazing outpost on the e5 square. In fact, Black would wish he could put his e6 pawn on the "c" file instead so that it could fight for the control of e5 and get a similar outpost on e4.
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_5 on 2021-07-06. Score: 3
  
  Just a small addendum: As a Bf4 player who never plays London but his own obscure systems (which are extremely dangerous for both sides - in the days before computer preparation, I clobbered a few GMs with them I only play e3. My own experience is that the most doubly-edged Black plan is pestering b2 with his queen. e3 (developing, also keeping the option Nc3, eat b2 and die!) is asking for it. After c3, you can wuss out by answering Qb6 with Qb3, but that is extremely drawish. Oh, and immediate cxd4 gives White a nice outpost on e5.
  
  
  ---
  
  