So I won a game which I'm pretty satisfied by the way I played Caro Can, but after analyzing it at move 6 I played Nf3, while the Engine and database favored Ne2 more. So my question is, what is the theory or idea behind Ne2 rather than Nf3?
Ne2 doesn't usually appeal to me as it feels too passive, while Nf3 has a more active role, and gives options fro a possible Ng5 attack.
lichess.org/embed/GxiUdk8F#10?theme=auto&bg=autoI would start earlier. 4.Bd3 is considered inferior and rather simple-minded. It makes Black‘s life easier. Old plan for Black: swapping the Bishops and Qa5+, Qa6 with good play. White has the wrong bishop left.
*Caro-Kann
Indeed. Horatio Caro and Marcus Kann.
The knight on e2 has the option to go to the f4 square where it puts pressure on Black's position. Sometimes knight sacrifices on e6 can work. Here's a simple trap that may help, though this isn't specifically the Caro-Kann:
1. e4 b6 2. d4 Bb7 3. Nc3 e6 4. Bd3 Nf6 5. Nge2 d5 6. e5 Nfd7 7. Nf4 c5 8. Nxe6
fxe6 ( 8... Qc8 9. Nb5 fxe6 10. Qh5+ Kd8 11. Bg5+ Nf6 ( 11... Be7 12. Nd6 Nf6
13. Bxf6 Qd7 14. Bxg7 Bxd6 15. Bxh8 ) 12. exf6 g6 13. Bxg6 ) ( 8... Qe7 9. Nxd5
Bxd5 10. Nc7+ Kd8 11. Nxd5 ) 9. Qh5+ g6 ( 9... Ke7 10. Bg5+ ) 10. Bxg6+ *
I think in terms of where the other pieces go also. The queen's knight needs to be active, and the queen side is too cramped to have a nice deployment. So the queen's knight should find activity on g5 via f3, and the king's knight can support f5 from g3 or reroute itself to h5.
6 Nf3 is no worse than 6 Nge2. It is a matter of taste.
4 Bd3 is not worse than the alternatives. It trades the good bishop Bf1, but the bad bishop Bf5 is outside the pawn chain and thus not as bad either. The trade wins a tempo Qxd3.
It is very difficult to criticize moves 4 or 6. Who knows?
4... Bd3 is the dubious move. 6.Ne2 I would say is slightly more natural than 6.Nf3 but it's not a big deal.
They are at least ten 4th moves with a score > 50%. There’s a reason why 4.Bd3 only scores 42%.
