20725 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Backgammon, Yatzy, and more!
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
In Open Games Nf6 attacks an undefended pawn. The d-pawn is held by the Queen. The e-pawn is just out there on its own.
Nf6 prepares to castle and requires White to spend a move either defending the pawn (d3) or upping the ante and playing Ng5 to start a diversionary attack.
The f-pawn break is the secondary break against a double king-pawn opening. Black's first choice is d5. If the game stalls out, he may try for f5 to liven things up.
The f-pawn push is often seen as a weakening of the King's likely home in a castled position--and with a Bishop on c4 already, it isn't a good idea.
In the Queen-pawn openings, the c-pawn is the primary break pawn to crack at White's center. Black wants to hit with that first and only after that fails, go for e5.
Any similarity between these two openings (Veresov/London?) and the Fried Liver is purely illusory.
Yeah but too bad white is clearly losing after ...bc5 in the kingside. In the queenside one even if black doesn't play nc6, after nb5 black is forced to develop the knight to a poor a6 square
gavinator why dont you read my post before comenting, what i said is its irisponsable to tell begginers to play an open game if there personality clashes with that type of chess position many people who are forced into a certain mould playing chess tend to get bored and frustrated quickly, i also startedby playing the italian and other e4 variations but thats how i like to play and my personality matches that i dont memorise lots of oppenings i stick to oppening principles which if you bothered to read my origional post properly you would have seen me state.
I can't think of any beginner who wants to sit through a 70 move long draw, I think they usually enjoy 20 move wins or losses...
for a start when white brings out his dark squared bishop just move a6 just dont bring out the queenside knight at that point like a moron and its easily defended and whilst white is so determined to inflict his silly oppening he over extends himself and black destroys white.
Yes, defend a joke opening with joke moves. Good plan.
Browni, see that's the beauty of this opening. It forces you to defend it with moves such as a6 that put black behind. The kingside one however, is countered by bc5.
just look at classical systems. There is a lot of complications in them and both sides can have good chances at the amateur level to win. While everyone mimics current GMs and the openings they play people forget that the classics is where they started and we are just seeing the polished result.
Kasparov broke out openings such as the evans gambit and scotch.
My theory is play something stratetgically straight foward so you can focus on finding good moves with out trying to guess which subtle strategy is the best one to follow. Italian, scotch, Kings gambit even are all good.
I also think that your weakness is in a particular area you should specifically play openings that highlight that weakness and force you to improve that area instead of hiding and trying to survive 30 moves.... (::cough:: ...London...::cough::) Being lost after 10 moves and it taking 20 moves to prove it is just as bad as being checkmated in 10 moves. sometimes worse since it gives a false sense of security.
Mr. FLchessplayer I must sya I love your approach to coaching and believe its very understimated the way you describing things in the above post is just perfect and I won my very first tournament even though I myself was a begnnier (A U600 tourney) by following those approaches and I think your caoching should be the modern way to teach new players and wanted to ask is there anyway youd coach me.
<<and wanted to ask is there anyway youd coach me.>>
Send me an e-mail. (NO-SPAMlifemasteraj@yahoo.com)
remove the "No-SPAM"
So ... a beginner wants to LOSE a 20 move game ... as compared to a long, tough draw? Seriously?????
If they do this then they will simply lack in tactics and lose any time the opponent feels like sacking something...
If they're bored it's probably because they don't know what's going on - not because they're tired of attacking f7.
i don't care anymore, take my advice or don't, i'm just here to try and be helpful.
I don't think many beginners make it to a 70 move draw. Most make horrible errors in the early endgame and go right down the drain.
Basically, beginners may get through the opening, but will usually croak in the later stages, where their big focus on the opening has left them completely unprepared.
aljay, you are trying to be helpful, but its just not very good advice. Beginners should play open games so they can learn basic principles of development and attack, whether they win or lose with those. It's all about improvement. If they sit there and endlessly move pieces around, then they're not going to get much better, are they?
are you seriously suggesting that closed games are not tactical, i agree about the basic principles of development and attack both can be learned regardless of your style, plus you have plenty of tools these days to help you along with those too
then why are they called closed?
DrSpudnik, beginners make it to a 70 move draw a surprising amount of the time, just one side is usually up multiple queens at the time of the "long, tough draw"
Also, in response to above comments:
Closed games can still be tactical - they often are. However, tactics in general come from positional superiority and active pieces, which is difficult to get when you play something as unambitious as the London or the Colle, leading to games with fewer tactical ideas for white than open games as he hasn't in any way pursued optimal development of his pieces. Closed games where both sides fight for optimal play have plenty of tactics - the King's Indian, the Dutch, the Semi-Slav, and the Ruy Lopez, for example. However, it's obviously not a good idea to recommend a theoretical monstrosity like the KID or a Semi-Slav to a beginner, which is why it's considered preferable by conventional knowledge to have them play open positions which are based on simple development and tactics (often gambits).
The basic argument is that when you're starting out you don't really have a style. It's more like some weird view of chess based on misconceptions and disinformation. Tactics just means attacking things over and over and who knows what players see positional ideas as.
Tal had style. He could attack and with great accuracy. But he could always choke your position to death if he needed to. Club players just can't do that. Instead they just attack any and everything. They may seem to have an attacking style, but in reality they're just lucky swingers - not boxers. They're training to become better fighters but they aren't there yet.
What's interesting about boxing is that the same approach is taken. You are trained to be an all-rounder until you find what you're good at. But that's a LONG way down the road.
"The basic argument is that when you're starting out you don't really have a style. It's more like some weird view of chess based on misconceptions and disinformation."
The funny thing is that from what I've heard from strong players, this holds true until around 23-2400.
Looks like I'm screwed then.
ebchess, why would beginners play two of the most theory intensive openings of all? They should play something that simply develops pieces and is theory-lite. I recommend the Italina Game, knowing most beginners play it, and as for black, doing e5 and seeing what white plays and properly defending against it, with an open game.
Is there any chance that a 1300 rated player can beat a 2700 rated player?
by mdinnerspace a few minutes ago
Chess.com Banner Announcements
by Aperture a few minutes ago
More ratings talk
by MJL71160 3 minutes ago
by X_PLAYER_J_X 3 minutes ago
How long did it take you to become a 1200?
by Doverblitzking 4 minutes ago
11/30/2015 - The Art of Breaking Through
by theboss6131 6 minutes ago
U2200 or U2000
by yureesystem 9 minutes ago
He timed out not me?!
by razielx4crazy 10 minutes ago
website not responding reliably
by sacaric 15 minutes ago
by batgirl 15 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2015 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!