Answers.Body: <p>Actually, both of these are defending. White's threat is to win a pawn, and both 2... Nc6 and 2... Nf6 are aiming to diffuse that threat: one by preventing White from taking the pawn in the first place, and one by turning it into an exchange of pawns (after 3... d6). A true counterattack would be to ignore the threat, and create a different threat of your own, giving White a choice of winning the pawn or responding to your new threat.</p>
  <p>The fact that of these two defensive moves, the second is more drawish is because a) it leads to a more symmetrical position and b) it exchanges the e pawns rather than keeping them on the board.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2024-09-14T09:18:16.233Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2024-09-14T09:18:16.233Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Especially Lime
Answers.Body: <blockquote>
  <p>Why does counterattacking lead to a more drawish and less dynamic position than defending？</p>
  </blockquote>
  <p>The obvious answer is, of course, that both your assumptions are wrong. 3 ply into the game where neutral moves are played is far too early to apply labels like &quot;drawish&quot; or &quot;dynamic&quot;.</p>
  <p>The truth is that white still has a small initiative and so has the most say in determining whether the game is dynamic or drawish.</p>
  <p>First of all consider:</p>
  <pre><code>[Title &quot;The 4 Knights - whatever black plays&quot;]
  [fen &quot;&quot;]
  [StartPly &quot;6&quot;]
  
  1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 (2...Nc6 3. Nc3 Nf6) 3. Nc3 Nc6
  </code></pre>
  <p>In both variations shown we end up in the same position except that in one black played the &quot;drawish&quot; line and in the second the more &quot;dynamic&quot;.</p>
  <p>If black plays the Petroff and white wants a dynamic game then this is a particularly exciting possibility:</p>
  <pre><code>[Title &quot;The Cochrane Gambit&quot;]
  [fen &quot;&quot;]
  [StartPly &quot;9&quot;]
  
  1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 d6 4. Nxf7 Kxf7 5. Bc4+
  </code></pre>
  <p>It's always very important, especially in the opening, to not play to formulae. Play the position in front of you and make the moves that you want to try and reach the kinds of positions you feel comfortable in.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2024-09-14T10:35:22.433Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2024-09-14T10:35:22.433Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Brian Towers
Body: <p>After 1. e4 e5 2.Nf3, the two most common continuations are 2... Nc6 and 2... Nf6, the first move defends the e5 pawn and the second counterattacks the e4 pawn.</p>
  <p>How to explain in layman's terms why counter attacking the pawn leads to a more drawish and less dynamic position than defending the pawn？</p>
  
Tags: <opening><beginner><1.e4><petroff-defense>
Title: Why does counterattacking lead to a more drawish and less dynamic position than defending？
ThreadText: # Why does counterattacking lead to a more drawish and less dynamic position than defending？
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2024-09-14)
  
  After 1. e4 e5 2.Nf3, the two most common continuations are 2... Nc6 and 2... Nf6, the first move defends the e5 pawn and the second counterattacks the e4 pawn.
  
  How to explain in layman's terms why counter attacking the pawn leads to a more drawish and less dynamic position than defending the pawn？
  
  **Tags:** opening, beginner, 1.e4, petroff-defense
  
  
  ---
  
  ## 2 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_1 on 2024-09-14. Score: 5
  
  Actually, both of these are defending. White's threat is to win a pawn, and both 2... Nc6 and 2... Nf6 are aiming to diffuse that threat: one by preventing White from taking the pawn in the first place, and one by turning it into an exchange of pawns (after 3... d6). A true counterattack would be to ignore the threat, and create a different threat of your own, giving White a choice of winning the pawn or responding to your new threat.
  
  The fact that of these two defensive moves, the second is more drawish is because a) it leads to a more symmetrical position and b) it exchanges the e pawns rather than keeping them on the board.
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_2 on 2024-09-14. Score: 5
  
  > Why does counterattacking lead to a more drawish and less dynamic position than defending？
  
  The obvious answer is, of course, that both your assumptions are wrong. 3 ply into the game where neutral moves are played is far too early to apply labels like "drawish" or "dynamic".
  
  The truth is that white still has a small initiative and so has the most say in determining whether the game is dynamic or drawish.
  
  First of all consider:
  
  ```
  [Title "The 4 Knights - whatever black plays"]
  [fen ""]
  [StartPly "6"]
  
  1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 (2...Nc6 3. Nc3 Nf6) 3. Nc3 Nc6
  
  ```
  
  In both variations shown we end up in the same position except that in one black played the "drawish" line and in the second the more "dynamic".
  
  If black plays the Petroff and white wants a dynamic game then this is a particularly exciting possibility:
  
  ```
  [Title "The Cochrane Gambit"]
  [fen ""]
  [StartPly "9"]
  
  1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 d6 4. Nxf7 Kxf7 5. Bc4+
  
  ```
  
  It's always very important, username_1 in the opening, to not play to formulae. Play the position in front of you and make the moves that you want to try and reach the kinds of positions you feel comfortable in.
  
  
  ---
  
  