Shankland is Mostly Right, But...

I’m watching Sam Shankland’s Chess24 course “Why Play 1.d4?” (in part an ad for his Chessable course giving a 1.d4 repertoire), and in the third video he notes a repertoire issue. Suppose you’re a 1.d4 player who wants to avoid the Gruenfeld. No problem: you can start with 1.Nf3 (or 1.c4). If you’re a 1.e4 player trying to avoid certain openings with 1.Nf3, however, you’re stuck. You have to play 1.e4. If you start with 1.Nf3, then after Black’s two most popular moves, 1…Nf6 and 1…d5, you can’t get back to a 1.e4 opening.

That’s true, but if you’re worried about 1…e5 and the Petroff/Berlin/Marshall systems (and aren’t enthused about the Italian Game or other diversions from the Ruy), you could play 1.Nf3 and happily meet the reasonably popular 1…c5 with 2.e4. A less likely option, but one that occurred the very first time I beat a 2300 in a tournament game, you might get lucky and see this:

1.Nf3 f5!? 2.e4!? e5?? 3.Nxe5+-

You may think my punctuation is exaggerated, and it is…maybe. Two question marks for 2…e5, transposing into the Latvian, is perhaps half a question mark too many. Perhaps. As for the ‘+-’, that’s not an exaggeration. White does have a decisive advantage, not that Black will resign voluntarily at this point. (If Black realized how bad the Latvian was, 2…e5?? wouldn’t have appeared on the board. So the game might take another 15-20 move before Black throws in the towel.)

Anyway, the point is that while Shankland is right, speaking generally, it’s not impossible to find ways of reaching 1.e4 positions by transposition. Another move that can be used to that end is 1.Nc3. In case of 1…c5, there’s 2.e4, and it’s a Sicilian. No explanation is needed to explain how 1…c6 or 1…e6 will turn into e4 openings if White is so inclined, and likewise for pretty much any single-square pawn push Black might employ. What about 1…e5? This is known to be a small trap: 2.Nf3! Nc6 3.d4! exd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Bg5 gives White a pleasant edge; the problem being that the natural 5…Be7? more or less loses to 6.Nf5, e.g. 6…0-0 7.Nxe7+ Qxe7 8.Nd5 Qe5 9.Bxf6 gxf6 10.e3 (better than the nervous 10.c3), and Black is lost.

There is a drawback to 1.Nc3, which is 1…d5. White can play 2.e4(?!), and if Black is kind it will transpose to normal 1.e4 lines, but Black is better after 2…d4. So White should be willing to play 2.d4 instead, when 2…Nf6 3.Bf4 is a very trendy line popularized by Baadur Jobava. (Note that 2…c6 or 2…e6 would allow a transposition to the Caro-Kann or the French, respectively, after 3.e4. Likewise, 2…Nf6 3.Bg5 e6 is a French after 4.e4.)

Another move the 1.Nc3 player must consider is 1…Nf6. Now 2.e4 e5 is a Vienna, which is not the most ambitious 1.e4 option for White. If you like it, then you’re set; if not, it’s possible to play 2.d4. If 2…d5, White plays 3.Bf4 - the Jobava line again - and if Black eschews 2…d5 White plays 3.e4, with a possible transposition to a favorable 1.e4 opening. (For example, 1.Nc3 Nf6 2.d4 d6 3.e4 g6 is a Pirc.)

Note: I’m not recommending 1.Nf3 for 1.e4-players - or recommending against it. And as I say in the title, I think Shankland is mostly right. I just want to insist on the “mostly” part: White does have some interesting transpositional options that can lead back to 1.e4 systems, even starting with 1.Nf3 (or 1.Nc3).