Answers.Body: <p>Maybe because it threatens BxN PxB, Nxc6, gaining a pawn? Therefore it reduces the range of moves that Black can play this move. Qa4 can then follow up (to a move like Ne7) to place pressure on the A knight and the C pawn.</p>
  <p>It also allows threats like Qf3 or Qh5, whose refutations might weaken Black's pawn structure?</p>
  <p>Just speculating.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-01-19T22:23:30.503Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2021-01-19T22:23:30.503Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Steve Bennett
Body: <p>Playing on <a href="https://www.chess.com/home" rel="nofollow noreferrer">chess.com</a> against the first advanced bot, &quot;Antonio&quot;, I've lost a game and looked at the analysis.</p>
  <p>The following is the state of the game not far from the beginning, where I had done only those moves that the engine considers either &quot;book&quot; or &quot;best&quot;:</p>
  <pre><code>r1bqkbnr/pp3ppp/n1p1p3/8/3PN3/5N2/PPP2PPP/R1BQKB1R w - - 0 2</code></pre>
  <p>At this point my move was c3:</p>
  <pre><code>r1bqkbnr/pp3ppp/n1p1p3/8/3PN3/2P2N2/PP3PPP/R1BQKB1R w - - 0 2</code></pre>
  <p>which the engines deems &quot;excellent&quot;, whereas the &quot;best&quot; move would be</p>
  <pre><code>r1bqkbnr/pp3ppp/n1p1p3/4N3/3PN3/8/PPP2PPP/R1BQKB1R w - - 0 2</code></pre>
  <p>My question is, why is this a better move? What advantage does it give to me? Is it in the short term?</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-01-19T21:16:35.997Z
Comments.Text: To all practical effects, they're equally as good. I'd prefer a more "human" developping move, though
Comments.UserDisplayName: David
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2021-01-19T23:52:28.480Z
Comments.Text: The chesscom analysis is done on such low depth that very little faith should be put into its difference between best, excellent, and even good in positions where there are no immediate tactics. I would not read anything into this.
Comments.UserDisplayName: NoseKnowsAll
Tags: <opening><analysis><learning><strategy><theory>
Title: Why is this a better move?
ThreadText: # Why is this a better move?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2021-01-19)
  
  Playing on [chess.com](https://www.chess.com/home) against the first advanced bot, "Antonio", I've lost a game and looked at the analysis.
  
  The following is the state of the game not far from the beginning, where I had done only those moves that the engine considers either "book" or "best":
  
  ```
  r1bqkbnr/pp3ppp/n1p1p3/8/3PN3/5N2/PPP2PPP/R1BQKB1R w - - 0 2
  ```
  
  At this point my move was c3:
  
  ```
  r1bqkbnr/pp3ppp/n1p1p3/8/3PN3/2P2N2/PP3PPP/R1BQKB1R w - - 0 2
  ```
  
  which the engines deems "excellent", whereas the "best" move would be
  
  ```
  r1bqkbnr/pp3ppp/n1p1p3/4N3/3PN3/8/PPP2PPP/R1BQKB1R w - - 0 2
  ```
  
  My question is, why is this a better move? What advantage does it give to me? Is it in the short term?
  
  **Tags:** opening, analysis, learning, strategy, theory
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: To all practical effects, they're equally as good. I'd prefer a more "human" developping move, though  
  > **username_2**: The chesscom analysis is done on such low depth that very little faith should be put into its difference between best, excellent, and even good in positions where there are no immediate tactics. I would not read anything into this.  
  
  ---
  
  ## 1 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_3 on 2021-01-19. Score: 1
  
  Maybe because it threatens BxN PxB, Nxc6, gaining a pawn? Therefore it reduces the range of moves that Black can play this move. Qa4 can then follow up (to a move like Ne7) to place pressure on the A knight and the C pawn.
  
  It also allows threats like Qf3 or Qh5, whose refutations might weaken Black's pawn structure?
  
  Just speculating.
  
  
  ---
  
  