I am writing an article about what it takes to win with the black pieces. I'm sure many of you have come across people who only play as white. So I'm writing it to figure out how to win as black. I have some experience winning as black. I have a 53.3 winning percentage as white(not factoring in draws) and a 68.1 winning percentage as black(again, no draws). That is 81W, 4D, and 38L as black compared to 57W, 6D, 50L as white.
Anyways... My point is to ask you guys what you think of the whole White vs Black debate. "Win with white, draw with black" is a phrase I've heard many times and I want to know what you think of this. What should players be thinking, or what do you think, when you HAVE to win as black.
Is it psychology that wins more games. "I am white so I HAVE to have an advantage.(even if the position is equal)" Is it opening knowledge and steering the game into somewhat more familiar lines. Is it my French defense? What is it that causes players to simply refuse to play as black and what is it that causes them to think this way. Any and all thoughts on this subject is greatly welcomed.
I have a 33-5 record as black, 39-15 as white. I don't see the sense in "draw as black, win as white." Black can control the tide of the game. I play a Pirc variation very well. The french, scandinavian, and sicilian...and really, any defense, can control the tempo.
I feel more comfortable as black b/c I know my opponent's intentions rather than white, when I have no idea what opening my opponent will use.
I've never met anyone who didn't want to play black.Sure,there are lots of people who very much prefer white,but absolutely refusing to play black is just weird 😕
I think below master level it doesn't matter which color you play.The believe in a white advantage actually works in black's favor,cause players having white often assess the position too optimistic causing them to try unsound attacks.
I do believe there's a psychological issue here.For instance,take any puzzlebook and you'll see at least 80% is 'white to win'.Read an openingbook and most mainlines end with += or at best =+.It creates a mindset that white is better.Maybe this is true maybe it's not,I'm not a good enough player to judge.
Read Adorjan's books 'black is OK!' 'Black is still OK!' and 'Black is OK forever!'.He makes some good observations about playing black.Also some very strange ones LOL
Originally posted by ouwe belgUser 335338
I've never met anyone who didn't want to play black.Sure,there are lots of people who very much prefer white,but absolutely refusing to play black is just weird 😕
Originally posted by hammster21I have a 64.2 winning percentage as black, and a 58 winning percentage as black in OTB, my most common openings are the French and e5, currently using Najdorf, black is usually behind in development when playing lower rated players, as they are most often defending an early attack, they are making a lot of defensive moves while white is mainly developing and capitalizing on blacks slight disadavantage in development. Although whites early development also sometimes lead to early counterplay by black, white will usually make a premature aggresive attacks, black can then counter this while setting up an attack, a basic example example of this would be 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3. Sometimes black can use this "disadvantage" as a key offense, such as in the Najdorf, whites early lead in development looks almost unstoppable, yet with good play white can wuickly fall behind and their position can falter quickly.
I am writing an article about what it takes to win with the black pieces. I'm sure many of you have come across people who only play as white. So I'm writing it to figure out how to win as black. I have some experience winning as black. I have a 53.3 winning percentage as white(not factoring in draws) and a 68.1 winning percentage as black(again, no draws ...[text shortened]... causes them to think this way. Any and all thoughts on this subject is greatly welcomed.
Originally posted by RamnedI also feel that way. To a certain extent, I reach a point where I draw with white, but win with black.
I feel more comfortable as black b/c I know my opponent's intentions rather than white, when I have no idea what opening my opponent will use.
Originally posted by likeforestThe color I'm playing with shouldn't affect my blundering rate(which is high). The difference between the two is too huge to think it is chance or luck. I, as rammed has said, Feel much more comfortable as black. It might just be completely in your mind. I once played the French as white, it looked the same as if i had the black pieces and lost. I looked over it a while ago and thought I rushed it. I tried to make an advantage(because i was white) when there was none.
Hammster(don't ban me for editing spelling), because you are still blundering pieces the win, draw, lose ration is completely abstract. I wouldn't pay any attention to it at all.
Do you guys feel that just because you are white, there must be some advantage on the board and there is some forced way to convert it into a win?
Originally posted by hammster21There isn't a forced way to convert it to a win, but that half tempo can be noticeable. White generally has more space, or is the first to initiate attacks, or something.
The color I'm playing with shouldn't affect my blundering rate(which is high). The difference between the two is too huge to think it is chance or luck. I, as rammed has said, Feel much more comfortable as black. It might just be completely in your mind. I once played the French as white, it looked the same as if i had the black pieces and lost. I looked ...[text shortened]... ere must be some advantage on the board and there is some forced way to convert it into a win?
Originally posted by hammster21The first thing that struck me is that maybe you need to reconsider your opening repertoire as white?
The color I'm playing with shouldn't affect my blundering rate(which is high). The difference between the two is too huge to think it is chance or luck. I, as rammed has said, Feel much more comfortable as black. It might just be completely in your mind. I once played the French as white, it looked the same as if i had the black pieces and lost. I looked ...[text shortened]... ere must be some advantage on the board and there is some forced way to convert it into a win?
I selected mine after carefully considering where my strengths & weaknesses are, then picking the openings that limit my opponents viable responses to at least some extent.
Originally posted by SquelchbelchI have been looking for good openings for white much longer then I have as black. I've tried everything, but thats not what I'm trying to get at here. I'm trying to see what you guys think about the differences between white and black.
The first thing that struck me is that maybe you need to reconsider your opening repertoire as white?
I selected mine after carefully considering where my strengths & weaknesses are, then picking the openings that limit my opponents viable responses to at least some extent.
Thanks AThousandYoung, its true that white often has more space and intiates that attacks more often, but is that enough of an advantage? If white loses the advantage of the first move, as in black equalizes, what is the winning percentage of white then? That would be a curious study.
ouwe belg sent me a message that I thought was really interesting:
I once did an experiment in a local chessclub. You divide all the players in two groups.Try to make 2 groups of equally mixed ratings(3 1700's each, 2 1800's each, 3 1900's each etc..). Then show 1 group a set of positions,which Fritz or any other strong engine (if you can get a GM or IM instead of Fritz this would even be better) assesses as equal,on charts you made and ask each player to write down their assessment of which side is better. Do the same with the 2nd group but show them charts with the same position but colors reversed.
The result I got was an astounishing 85% of 'White is better' in BOTH groups.
I thought about making a thread and asking who was better in certain positions. I read in one of silmans books how there was a study with equal positions and more people thought that their side (the side to move next) was better, even in pretty clearly even or drawn games.
It's an interesting topic that I think might have more to do with willpower then anything. As black I'm always trying to find how white made a mistake. As white I play more routine moves and I say, "Well I'm white so it should just win itself." I wonder what some of the better players on this site have to say. Is white more of an advantage or does the defense catch up?
edit: I just made a kind of assumption between white and black. I refered to black as "the defense" just above. I think it might be imprinted in our brains that in order for white to have a real advantage, he needs to attack in order to keep it.
Originally posted by RamnedI agree with Ramned here. When playing black I’ve always felt much more comfortable (on account of my being able to dictate the opening.) I don’t subscribe to the somewhat trite axiom that at the beginning of a game, white has Zugzwang, but it’s clear that the sensible options are limited.
I have a 33-5 record as black, 39-15 as white. I don't see the sense in "draw as black, win as white." Black can control the tide of the game. I play a Pirc variation very well. The french, scandinavian, and sicilian...and really, any defense, can control the tempo.
I feel more comfortable as black b/c I know my opponent's intentions rather than white, when I have no idea what opening my opponent will use.
In my 494 completed games here, my record runs like this:
WHITE
😏 = 64.5% 😴 = 15.8% 😳 = 19.7%
BLACK
😏 = 73.9% 😴 = 10.4% 😳 = 15.7%
So, I tend to prefer black, by a ratio (on RHP, at least) of about 57:43
[edit - just won another game.... with the black pieces!]
Originally posted by AThousandYoungbut that may not neccesarily be an advantage --
There isn't a forced way to convert it to a win, but that half tempo can be noticeable. White generally has more space, or is the first to initiate attacks, or something.
If white is first to initaite an attack then that also means he is first to show his plan, which may well give black the advantage, particually if white has started the attack with something potenically weakening (eg, pawnstorms leave unguarded squares in their wake)
not only that, in some openings white's extra tempo, isn't particually helpful, an extra tempo is only handy if you can do something effective with it.
Since databases containing millions of master games show White scoring about 55%, it is beyond doubt that White has an advantage of some sort. But is there an advantage of being White for amatuers?
Anyone who thinks that they're clearly better with Black than White should play 1 a3 as White, then play like Black for the rest of the opening.
In one of his articles, IM Cecil Purdy expressed his surrpise that more players didn't play their Black defenses when they were White. He pointed out that such an approach would cut the player's study time on openings about in half!