13 Jan 21
Hi everyone, happy New Year!
Back to the site after a few years away and addicted to chess again. I love the (possibly) new games explorer feature where you can view your old games and can see which openings you prefer.
I experimented quite a lot in my openings when I first started playing but I seemed to have settled into certain openings that I really like - I like cautious, strategic openings that don’t have a lot of tactics from the very outset which I think kind of reflects my (can’t think on my feet) approach to life in general.
I’m curious if those of you who have settled into certain openings have also noticed certain characteristics about them and wondered why you chose them as the way to start a game?
- Joined
- 10 Jan 08
- Moves
- 19047
13 Jan 21
It’s a curious one, sometimes I’ll mix it up a bit but if I’m playing a game I want to win more than enjoy I have one opening for white and one for black that I’ll go with. Obviously the following moves depends on your opponent but if you’re comfortable and getting some wins, why mix it up?
13 Jan 21
Just tried the thing where you view past games. When you click 'info' it lists 'opening' amongst other things. Does the opening named refer to what white did regardless of what black did about it or does it refer to how the game opened between the two players? Also what is the opening called "Fred".
13 Jan 21
@relentless-red saidThe Fred Opening should probably be called the Duras Opening after the Czech grandmaster Oldrich Duras who used it three times in an exhibition match against Ossip Bernstein in the first half of the last century. It goes 1.e4 f5, I wouldn't recommend it, Duras was probably playing it to entertain the crowd rather than for its intrinsic merits.
Just tried the thing where you view past games. When you click 'info' it lists 'opening' amongst other things. Does the opening named refer to what white did regardless of what black did about it or does it refer to how the game opened between the two players? Also what is the opening called "Fred".
The opening depends on what both players do. For it to be a Ruy Lopez, for example, then 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 has to be played in that order. If the same position is reached via 1. e4 Nc6 2. Bb5 e5 3. Nf3, or some such, then it's the Ruy Lopez by transposition. So, typically there's a specific position and a canonical move order to get to it. The letters and numbers before the opening name, like A00 or B30, are called ECO codes and are a cataloguing system used by the Encyclopedia of Chess Openings, which has become standard the openings have names because no one can remember the ECO codes...
@relentless-red saidI think it just refers to the first few moves depending on opening theory.Common openings will sometimes "transpose" into different ones so I don't really know how far it goes.Others will know more,"Fred" is a documented opening that you can google.
Just tried the thing where you view past games. When you click 'info' it lists 'opening' amongst other things. Does the opening named refer to what white did regardless of what black did about it or does it refer to how the game opened between the two players? Also what is the opening called "Fred".
Inevitably on here,you get to play the same players over and over again.
Before I start a game,I sometimes look at my record against a player and see what openings I have used previously and occasionally try something different than my usual standard openings just to add some variety.
With players I have played lots I don't tend to bother doing this.
I don't consider myself to be a "serious" player but play mainly for fun so I'm far too lazy to study opening theory with a view to becoming an expert in one opening or another
13 Jan 21
@double-g saidBefore I knew there was such a thing as an opening, before about 1990, I'd just make moves. Someone showed me the Kings Indian Attack in about 1988 and misinformed me that it was the best opening, so I'd just adopt that set up in every game. Later I started playing 1. e4, aiming for a Spanish, the open Sicilian or the Nc3 lines against the French. As black I'd play the Najdorf against 1. e4 and the King's Indian against 1. d4. In the meantime I've started playing any old thing. Recently I've come to the conclusion that a system like the following for selecting openings is the right thing to do, but I need to explain something about what the ratings system means first.
Hi everyone, happy New Year!
Back to the site after a few years away and addicted to chess again. I love the (possibly) new games explorer feature where you can view your old games and can see which openings you prefer.
I experimented quite a lot in my openings when I first started playing but I seemed to have settled into certain openings that I really like - I like c ...[text shortened]... ticed certain characteristics about them and wondered why you chose them as the way to start a game?
A ratings difference of 400 implies that the stronger player can expect a score of 90% against the weaker one. As the stronger player we want a simple position the weaker player will misplay. As the weaker player we want as complicated a position as possible, we need to take them into a dark forest.
A ratings difference of 200 corresponds to the stronger player expecting a score of 75%. This means that the weaker player can play for a draw as white, which can be a pain.
A ratings difference of 100 corresponds to an expected score for the stronger player of 65% (ish), so the weaker player starts needing to win with the white pieces.
It is difficult to play for a win in things like the exchange variation of the Slav defence.
A major weakness in my game is that I'm bad at symmetric positions.
I dislike the term "friendly game", since it implies that tournament games are somehow "unfriendly". Skittles games are ones where nothing is at stake, they are no more "friendly" than a tournament game.
1. Play all sorts of openings in Skittles games.
2. It's generally easier to play for a win as White, so just choose whatever opening suits you for competition games.
3. With black play something like the Dutch Defence against 1. d4 from players around 200 points weaker as it's easy to play for a win.
4. Keep it simple against really weak opponents, i.e. about 300+ points weaker, you can just outplay them in the ending. Exchange variations become attractive.
5. Play something wildly complicated like the Botvinnik variation of the semi-Slav as black when you are rated more than around 200 points less than your opponent, you only need a draw as white and can afford to lose as black so complicate.
6. Choose as complicated a line as white as you can against opponents more than 400 points stronger than you.
7. I'm not sure what to do as white against opponents in the 100 - 200 points stronger range, playing an opening you're comfortable with is probably the best plan.
So my current repetoire includes the Spanish, the Italian game, the Scotch, Birds opening, the London System, the Queen's Gambit, the French defence, the Sicilian aiming for a Najdorf, theoretically the King's Indian, the Dutch defence and a bunch of gambits - so I can choose lines depending on my opponent's rating relative to mine and whatever other information I have about them.
14 Jan 21
With White QGD (QGA) because it is a solid opening that gets me to a playable middle-game.
Black against e4, I use c5 and some version of the Sicilian because I like the unbalanced positions.
Black against d4, I use d4 and a Semi-Slav.
Black against c4, c5.
Anything else, play a center pawn 2 spaces.
14 Jan 21
@Double-G
Hello, Double Gambit. I am an authentic chessnerd, that is, I play chess variants. My preferred ones are Fischer random chess (Chess 960) and Carroll chess (Alice chess). I have also tried Shatranj. Re wild variants (say, antichess, atomic chess, chicken chess, &c.) I really don't like them cause they don't abide by the laws of chess.
I am a Chilean subject, that is, a Sudaka. English is my second language, Spanish is my first one. I am a regular member of the British-Chilean Institute of Culture. We created the first newspapers published in English, The Santiago Times. URL http://www.santiagotimes.cl/ You are invited to have a look at it. 🙂
14 Jan 21
2 edits
@double-g saidI’m curious if those of you who have settled into certain openings have also noticed certain characteristics about them and wondered why you chose them as the way to start a game?
Hi everyone, happy New Year!
Back to the site after a few years away and addicted to chess again. I love the (possibly) new games explorer feature where you can view your old games and can see which openings you prefer.
I experimented quite a lot in my openings when I first started playing but I seemed to have settled into certain openings that I really like - I like c ...[text shortened]... ticed certain characteristics about them and wondered why you chose them as the way to start a game?
I like the English as white because it's not something most OTB players prepare for. This may give me the advantage of superior knowledge, additionally it does not normally see multitude defenses to prepare for.
Against e4 I prefer the Caro Kann, for the same reasons as above, and because I like slow developing, but solid defenses that have stood the tests of tournament play
Against d4 I prefer the Slav. Similar pawn and piece patterns as the Caro Kann.
Unlike e4 as white or the Sicilian as black , all of these openings have a somewhat limited number of variations, which cut down greatly on opening prep. and rote memorization. This usually allows me to get out of the opening with a minimum of difficulty and directs the fireworks to the middlegame where I prefer to concentrate. 🙂
- Joined
- 03 Jul 13
- Moves
- 86141
15 Jan 21
@deepthought saidHi Deep Thought,
Before I knew there was such a thing as an opening, before about 1990, I'd just make moves. Someone showed me the Kings Indian Attack in about 1988 and misinformed me that it was the best opening, so I'd just adopt that set up in every game. Later I started playing 1. e4, aiming for a Spanish, the open Sicilian or the Nc3 lines against the French. As black I'd play the ...[text shortened]... depending on my opponent's rating relative to mine and whatever other information I have about them.
I was interested to read your views on how to play against stronger and weaker opponents - to look for simple positions against weaker players, and complicated positions against stronger players.
I think all these years I have been viewing it differently - I’ve thought that if I’m playing a weaker player they are more likely to be able to find the correct continuation in a simple position, and thus I prefer to complicate. And if I’m playing a stronger player, I often try to simplify on the basis that in a complicated position, they are going to find the correct continuation and I’m not!
So if when playing white I come up against the Slav for example, I’m more likely to play the Exchange Variation against a stronger player than a weaker one, which seems to be the complete opposite of what you recommend!
And I shy away from playing the King’s Gambit as white against stronger players, in case I get hideously embarrassed, but against weaker players, although I’m certainly not able to play the opening well, I tend to find my way through the complications better than my opponents do.
15 Jan 21
@ferdyred saidIf you like chess variants,it might be a good idea to look at Shogi.
@Double-G
Hello, Double Gambit. I am an authentic chessnerd, that is, I play chess variants. My preferred ones are Fischer random chess (Chess 960) and Carroll chess (Alice chess). I have also tried Shatranj. Re wild variants (say, antichess, atomic chess, chicken chess, &c.) I really don't like them cause they don't abide by the laws of chess.
I am a Chilean subject, that ...[text shortened]... glish, The Santiago Times. URL http://www.santiagotimes.cl/ You are invited to have a look at it. 🙂
I made my own pieces , played against friends and found it very interesting and good fun.
I expect you can play it online these days.