48 ( +1 | -1 ) The English Attack.After 1.e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6. Be3 e6... can the game safely be described as an English attack? For example lets say white didn't know the idea of the opening is to castle queenside and launch a pawnstorm with f3 and g4 and played other moves instead? Such as 0-0 and others? I'm not trying to get into a debate on good and bad moves in this opening just when and when not to classify the opening as the english attack. If white doesn't continue with f3 and g4 would the game be classed as a scheveningen?
27 ( +1 | -1 ) Hmmm...I read this thread from Chris21 and can't help but think he already knows the answer to his question... But why post the thread?... There has to be more to this than to ask a stupid question for an opening that can develop into various variations of that opening...
52 ( +1 | -1 ) I'm sorry, am I being insulted for asking a question here?
The reason I asked is when I play games for my club I write down the games in a book of mine at home. I list the opening under mine and my opponents name. One of my opponents recently played 6.Be3 followed by 7.f3 but he castled kingside. So I didn't know whether to class it as an English attack like my book on the Najdorf says it is after 6. Be3 e6 7.f3 or just a scheveningen since white didn't really play the "attack" part of the english attack.
35 ( +1 | -1 ) Chris21...Openings can sway from one variation to another... There are many paths to most variations of openings... In answer to your question I would put it down as the Scheveningen since you mentioned he didn't really play the "attack" part of the English Attack... My opologies for the rude conduct... But your first post wasn't that clear...