Originally posted by AttilaTheHornGood advice. Two possibilities:
You will need 3 openings, one with White and 2 with Black (one in response to 1.e4 and one in response to 1.d4), but it might also help to pick an opening with White and an opening with Black that relate to each other.
1. White: King's Indian Attack
Black vs. 1 e4: Pirc
Black vs. 1 d4, 1 c4 & 1 Nf3: King's Indian Defense
(These three openings are recommended by Seirawan in his Winning Chess Openings that I mentioned earlier.)
2. White: London System
Black vs. 1 e4: Caro-Kann
Black vs. 1 d4, 1 c4 and 1 Nf3: Slav Defense
I have played all of the above openings in tournaments and have done okay with all of them, although I wasn't real pleased with any of my Pirc games.
Originally posted by AttilaTheHorn1 Opening as white? You must be kidding unless you regard the opening as a single move!
You will need 3 openings, one with White and 2 with Black (one in response to 1.e4 and one in response to 1.d4)
Choose 1. e4 for example. Black can play 1.e5 when you have a massive choice (Kings Gambit, Ruy Lopez, Italian, Scotch, etc) but he can also play the French (when do you play the Advance, the Exchange or something else), the Sicilian, Caro Kann, Alekines, etc.
You need to find responses to all of these. I try and direct the game into my style so I usually respond 1.e4 .. e5, 2. f4; 1. e4 .. e6, 2. d4 .. d5, 3. e5; 1. e4 .. c5, 2. d4 .. cd, 3. c3 .. dc, 4. NXc3; 1. e4 .. c6, 2. d4 .. d5, 3. ed .. cd, 4. c4, etc. A lot of openings here to learn even as white.
mmmm, decide whether you like 1.d4 or 1.e4, i would suggest 1.e4 as in this we can try to hone our tactics, therefore all things being considered we need a repertoire that is organic, a living, breathing, growing entity that we understand, not through trial and error, but through a systematic exploration of related lines. What usually happens, and this has been my own experience, is, when we suffer a loss, we search for a different opening, imagining that it will confer on us some advantage that the other did not, this is nonsense and a form of self delusion, if we fall, remember the words of the Scottish king Robert Bruce when he saw the little spider try to spin his web, try,try, try again! Therefore a well designed repertoire funnels play through related channels so that the culminative experience deepens our understanding of the critical positions, and this is the key, OUR UNDERSTANDING, of the critical positions and strategies involved. i have gained almost 300 rating points in five months simply from having a general understanding of long term simple strategic goals. so if you choose 1.e4 we must consider some possibilities, what if black plays 1...d5, the Scandinavian or centre counter defence, how should we proceed? also how will we respond to 1...e5, here the branches of the tree are many and diverse, how can we channel this into a branch of our own understanding? 2..f4!, the Kings Gambit, some may suggest the Kings Indian attack here also, however, the Kings Indian has not done so well against 1...e5 as perhaps other black moves and this brings us to the Sicilian, the Caro-khan and the French, 1...c5,1...c6,1...e6, respectively. here the Kings Indian attack is an excellent choice and will channel play into areas of our understanding. so to conclude, i give my recommendations as follows and please bear in mind these are simply my suggestions for building a repertoire for white. Against 1.e4 i would recommend the French as its not so dependent on tactics but more on strategy and knowing where to put the pieces, white can forget about his dreams of attacking f7 and is an excellent choice as we can outplay really good tactical players with subtle moves, and against 1.d4 why not play the Kings Indian defence and minimise the amount of theory and lines that one has to confront in other openings, so my tuppence worth is as follows,
if we play 1.e4 we must consider
1.e4 d5, the Scandinavian
1.e4 e5 -2.f4 - the Kings Gambit
1.e4 c5,c6,e6 - The Kings Indian attack
as black
1.e4 e6 The French defence - excellent against strong tactical players
1.d4 Nf6 leading to Kings Indian defence
if this is in any way helpful i will be pleased, there now follows a short disclaimer.
these recommendations in no way whatsoever are to be considered objective truth and are simply given as a reference as representative of the authors own preferences - regards Robbie Carrobie chess noob 😀
Starting out with openings can be a bit like starting wine tasting when someone asks you what sort of wine do you like. An honest answer could be - I don't know. When I was starting to take chess seriously I wouldn't have known the difference between a positional game and an open tactical game because I just played and whatever happened happened.
I would suggest someone starts with 1.e4 as white and 1...e5 as black and uses a basic opening book that explains the basic principles and shows some introductory moves for a range of openings. And I'd recommend having a casual look through the first few moves of many openings just to become familiar with opening play in general and concentrate their study on tactics and endings.
Later on when they start to develop a preference for a style of play they can select some suitable openings for more detailed study and then go about selecting a repertoire.
I see the choice of an opening repertoire as something akin to a marriage and it's probably advisable to play around for a while before settling down. And when you do settle down they have to accept that it won't all be sharp attacks and fun and frolics all the time..there will be some highs and lows.
For myself I kept a mistress (The Trompovsky 1.d4...Nf6, 2.Bg5..) for a while - but it was too wild and unpredictable so I had to let it go and return to 1.d4...Nf6, 2.c4 and concentrate on some more of the basics - learning to walk before learning to run. But there was no harm done. I have some preparation should someone try it on me.
One thing I have learned about openings is that it's a vast subject....learning some has helped me to appreciate just how little I know.
I'd just like to say as i have always felt. It's a big chore to learn lost of annoying openings.
So what you do is simple! Don't learn them 🙂
Ok, what do i mean you ask? I mean just learn the principles of openings, the goals and not to fall into traps.
Such things as centralization, dont move same piece twice, dont rush and remember how you got beat from a opening until the next.
This will teach you all you need to know to get to a respectable level.
To advance further i suggest trying to play prophylaxis in the opening, that means that you try to hinder your oponents development while you develop on your own.
My tip's. And ofc openings are not bad at all but they are not the soul and enigma of the game.
Originally posted by Terawow, that's like really helpful? lets take your suggestion and try and put it into practise, so we decide to play 1.e4, our opponent plays the French defence 1..e6, ok, so we think ahh he wants to play 2...d5, ill use prophylaxis and play 2.Bb5? and he will be unable to play 1..d5 his beloved French defence, then our opponent plays Qg5 and our bishop and g pawn are already forked. i am playing a game where this actually happened at the moment against a 1500 rated player, although i chose not to play Qg5. please do not listen to this type of advice, a chess game consists of three parts, a beginning, a middle and an end, all are intrinsically linked, themes and ideas that we prepare in the opening carry on right through until the end. why put yourself at a disadvantage through laziness? 😀
I'd just like to say as i have always felt. It's a big chore to learn lost of annoying openings.
So what you do is simple! Don't learn them 🙂
Ok, what do i mean you ask? I mean just learn the principles of openings, the goals and not to fall into traps.
Such things as centralization, dont move same piece twice, dont rush and remember how you got beat ...[text shortened]... tip's. And ofc openings are not bad at all but they are not the soul and enigma of the game.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI agree. The advice to "learn opening principles" only works to a basic level. While you are busy controlling the center and developing your pieces, your opponent (who has played 10,000 games in internet blitz in this very line) is mating you. If you still think that you should play an early Queen sortie or get your rooks out by a4 and g4, then, yes, learn opening principles. Beyond that, you should pick a respectable opening move for white (probably e4 or d4) and a respectable response to 1e4 and 1d4 as black and spend some time developing experience with them. An opening book like Seriwan's "Winning Chess Openings", Kallai's two volume set, or Collins' recent book on openings will give you the basic concepts behind various openings and you can then choose the ones that best fit your playing style. I've always found it helpful to just look at basic middlegame positions from an opening and decide whether I would feel comfortable playing the position. For example, when I look through lines on the French, I would love to play the black side. When I look at the Pirc, I would much rather be white. So, I would prefer the French to the Pirc as a black defense. I think all of us have certain positions that just 'feel better'. We should take advantage of this and steer the game in this direction.
wow, that's like really helpful? lets take your suggestion and try and put it into practise, so we decide to play 1.e4, our opponent plays the French defence 1..e6, ok, so we think ahh he wants to play 2...d5, ill use prophylaxis and play 2.Bb5? and he will be unable to play 1..d5 his beloved French defence, then our opponent plays Qg5 and our bishop ...[text shortened]... carry on right through until the end. why put yourself at a disadvantage through laziness? 😀
Scott
Originally posted by robbie carrobiethat has nothing to do with following basic opening principles. they're perfectly satisfactory for opening play at least up to 1800 (kasparov said 2000 I think?). and all established openings follow the same principles as well.
wow, that's like really helpful? lets take your suggestion and try and put it into practise, so we decide to play 1.e4, our opponent plays the French defence 1..e6, ok, so we think ahh he wants to play 2...d5, ill use prophylaxis and play 2.Bb5? and he will be unable to play 1..d5 his beloved French defence, then our opponent plays Qg5 and our bishop ...[text shortened]... carry on right through until the end. why put yourself at a disadvantage through laziness? 😀
some of the hardest games I've played have been against people who play random openings. it's extremely easy to do major mistakes when you're in an unfamiliar position. if your opponent has been in that positions many times before, he likely has an advantage.
you may not get the best possible positions, but you'll get okay positions. at our level that tiny difference is hardly meaningful. it's good enough when you have loads of other stuff to study, and won't take much time to get started with. (to really understand opening principles, to gain deep knowledge about them, will take years. just watch some GM blitz for example, as they often play random openings not to give out their opening preparation. they almost always end up in a playable position, no matter how weird the beginning looks at first. some of the moves look very unintuitive to me, but the fact that they end up okay tells me that they simply understand the principles that well.)
I think you have all succeed in completely baffling this poor lad.
Never before had I read such naff and conflicting advice.
Mate don't listen to this nonsense.
Games are not won in the opening - they are won in the middle game.
Become a good middle game player (tactics).
I beat these bozos all the time at blitz from really bad openings
becauseI am good tactician. You can get a grade of 2000 on
tactics alone. I'm the proof. my grade in the real world is over 2000.
Don't listen to them - if they were really any good they would not
be hawking around on a noticeboard. - I'm here cos I love 5 minute chess and I cannot sleep.
When over 2000 and you know something about the game THEN
you can start to study openings. You need to when playing players
of that strength - for now, tactics, tactics and tactics.
And the rest of you should be ashamed. You clearly do not know
what you are talking about - really you don't.
('cept for LOUSEY he was nearly right)
Originally posted by greenpawn34I think there is a great deal of truth to what you say, but I don't think it's entirely fair to say that someone should just ignore openings until they hit 2000. Many players never get that good. And there are plenty of moves that seem reasonable in the opening that ultimately are not the strongest. Conversely, there are moves that seem to contradict basic principles yet are perfectly fine. Obviously, no one at a lower level should spend hours memorizing moves, but some familiarity with the openings you play will undoubtedly pay dividends.
I think you have all succeed in completely baffling this poor lad.
Never before had I read such naff and conflicting advice.
Mate don't listen to this nonsense.
Games are not won in the opening - they are won in the middle game.
Become a good middle game player (tactics).
I beat these bozos all the time at blitz from really bad openings
bec
what you are talking about - really you don't.
('cept for LOUSEY he was nearly right)
Scott
Originally posted by greenpawn34I see you are stunningly good with no games played so we need to take your claim of being 2000+ with a pinch of salt.
I think you have all succeed in completely baffling this poor lad.
Never before had I read such naff and conflicting advice.
Mate don't listen to this nonsense.
Games are not won in the opening - they are won in the middle game.
Become a good middle game player (tactics).
I beat these bozos all the time at blitz from really bad openings
bec ...[text shortened]...
what you are talking about - really you don't.
('cept for LOUSEY he was nearly right)
Firstly the OP asked a question about learning openings not about how to improve and many of us have mentioned the importance of tactics and basic strategy at his stage of knowledge but the question was not about that and most people have tried to answer his question, unlike you.
Also I must totally disagree with you about not needing to study openings until you are 2000+. 2000+ players generally tend to be reasonably good at tactics and recognising weaknesses and once you start coming up against them which you will from 1700 upwards if you want to have any chance you must avoid elementary opening mistakes or you will be destroyed and this means familiarising yourself with appropriate openings.
Originally posted by Dragon FireHe said "my grade in the real world is over 2000". And you're saying "no games played"... aren't you taking this out of context?
I see you are stunningly good with no games played so we need to take your claim of being 2000+ with a pinch of salt.
By-the-way, he has both FIDE and national grades at over 2000.