@kassanen said in #12:
> After 1.e4 Nf6 2. Nc3 the 2..e5 transports to the vienna game and never give black what he wants
> Also black could play 2..e6 3.d4 d5 (french) or 2..d6 3.d4 (pirc) or 2.. c5 3.e5 (sicilian) which is dubious
>
> Personally i never touch these lines. i play 1.e4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3.e5 Ne4 cause 3..Nfd7 again leads to french and the 3..d4 imo doesnt offer much for black,kinda drawish
>
> so with the line 1.e4 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3.e5 Ne4 u avoid all the transpo tricks and if white chooses instead of 3.e5 the inferios exd5 then Bf5+Qd5+0-0-0 pattern for black is a win in scandinavian cause white is already behind in development
>
> As of 2.d3 yes i agree 2..e5 is quite boring if u play conservative like i also do with this line but ok iwhat to do d7,Be7 etc but black could also has an eye on Bc5 italian patterns and if white moves with Bg5 then h6+g5 for black,risky but very interesting
If someone wants to play scandinavian, than you are right. I used to play it, but at some point decided, that I'd rather go for something simpler with less exchanges early on and seek for opponents mistakes early or just try to win mid/late-game.
I follow similar game plan with Maroczy and let white decide how sharp lines they want to play.
To conclude if one doesn't want to play against alekhine's defense it is not possible to force it, unless one wants to play sharper lines with scandinavian, as you said. Therefore, I would say there is no safe way for black to force anything here and white has wide range of options => OP's opinion is valid.