Violating Chess Principles

Recently some friends of ours, B. and B., have come over so that the distaff side of that couple can go on a long walk with my wife, down and then back up  our beautiful country road, and meanwhile the husband and I sray behind and contest a game of chess.

B. flattered me by saying that he had been waiting a long time to play me some chess.   I guess it's been out for a while that that is my game -- especially when a few years ago I managed to get out to play on quite  a few nights, though only for a short period, in the county seat 14 miles away.  A coffeehouse there was frequented by several  players who were surprisingly strong for such a tiny burg, and I enjoyed the games. I held my own, though eventually the night driving got to be too much for me.

B. said he had been playing chess for a long time, though I was astonished to hear that in that time he has only played three other people in his life, and one was his brother, with whom he played "thousands" of games.

I never thought to  mention  just when I first picked up the game, but I have a feeling that at the time B. had not yet been born, even if he could now be as old as 60!   But I immediately thought that three opponents is not nearly enough for anybody.  But I guess that depends on the strength of those opponents.

Two of B.'s first four moves as White told the tale.

On about his third move he played his King's Knight out to its R3 square, and on the next move he plunked down his Queen on his KB3, the square where that Knight ordinarily goes. 

These were violations of two of Chess's most basic principles, which I have almost never seen go unpunished to some degree.   You don't station a knight on the edge of the board at its first move.   Instead you aim it toward the all-important center.  And  even worse, you don't bring the Queen out at all, that early.  But aggressive people, especially while learning the game in the company of others who are also new to the game, like to try to scare their opponents by brandishing the lady straight off, having heard that  she is the most powerful piece.  And that's true, but they don't realize that, nevertheless, this is playing right into the hands of more experienced players, who instead instantly start licking their chops, because they know that, with so many men still on the board, the threats posed by the enemy queen at that stage are all easily parried, and that instead she merely offers an easy target for first one piece and then another of far lesser value.

B. tried that Queen sally in both the games we've played so far, and both times it quickly and fatally wrecked his position.  I tried to tell him that it wasn't a good thing to do, but I could tell that, probably remembering numerous earlier successes, he wasn't buying that wisdom of bitter experience from many ages past.   And the same thing with sidelining his Knight on  its first move.

B. is vowing to keep playing me regardless, because he just enjoys chess, and he has now gotten too old for all his former sports except golf.  But I am curious about how long he can keep it up, should I keep on winning, though it is early yet.

Though a longtime and highly respected schoolteacher, he has probably never  extended his studies to chess books, and knowing what they have to say goes a long way toward making things easier and more comprehensible.

I am steadily getting older and shakier, and I could always overlook something, so I guess  there's always that chance, too.

But I retain enough of the arrogance of my long ago youth  to strongly doubt it.