12748 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?
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!
Hi, my first post here (but I have played club chess for a decade so I am not a new beginner).
Those of you who are in this siutation: you have made serious attempts to work out a respetable repertoire as white, but in the end found it to require too much work. Now you look for a simpler off-beat system that allows you to play chess without needing to prepare lines against booked-up opponents.
I played 1.e4 but found it quite difficult to meet the Sicillian. I played 1.d4 and 1.c4 but certain systems seemed to need rather much opening work, to get reasonable positions. And, most black players study systems as black against these first moves.
So, I have now tried Torre attack (c3+d4+Nf3+Bg5), London (as Torre, but Bf4), Bird (f4, b3 or g3), and now I am trying the Nimzo-Larsen attack.
What do you think: 1.Nf3 + 2.b3, with possibilities to transpose into certain mainlines at desire. E.g., against the Dutch I can go 2.c4 + 3.g3, and there can be an English sometimes. Dear friends, I would really like to hear from you your free thoughts on all this. Do you struggle in a similar fashion, seeking the "heaven" (some system that suddenly will transform your play :)
Thanks. Yes I know, that is a frequently heard argument, and I am sure it is essentially true. But, on the other hand, if we want to use our study time on other areas such as tactics, endgames and general strategy, then it is not that easy to play Roy Lopez, or getting a Gruenfeld when playing 1.d4.
So, my question is, what is a good pragamtic approach here? It seems to me that the fluid pawn structures resulting from 1.Nf3, 2.b3, then perhaps e3 + c4, seem to be strategically rich and similar to the English. But no prepared auto-responses from Black ...
If you want a line against the gruenfeld that has less theory, play you can play this slightly offbeat variation:
It will take less time to learn this line and you will probably know more theory than the gruenfeld player who has to learn all of the mainlines. Also the idea is rather interesting: to play e4 without Nxc3!
Thanks again. I just wanted to mention a variation that is traditionally very theoretical (Gruendfeld). The variation you give, isn't it going to be roughly as off-beat as 1Nf3 + b3?
If I need off-beat weapons in Benoni, Benko, Nimzo, QID, etc ...
I am not in any way saying that it is wrong to play main-lines, but I believe there can be certain advantages in less known systems.
Anyone with experience from the Nimzo-Larsen?
Yes, I was suprised too see how little there is out there on this opening- I couldn't fimd much at all.
I will give it a try. I guess g3 doesn't go well together with e3 (which seems logical, reversed Nimzo + white might want to go for a c2-c4 in the near future).
i really think that your first move by white is basically your opinion.People say e4,d5,c4,Nf3,e3,d3,b3,g3 and so on.The reality is that if you play any first move black will come out with some opening.
I really think it depends on your opening knowledge.Let just say that you know very well the sicillian from both sides very well and you really can not remember the London System then playing a move like d5 c6 e6 followed with the Bd6.Well then play the sicillian.(sorry if my spelling is off)You always need a back up plan.If your opponent plays d4. c5 is not a pleasant response losing a pawn.So, d4 d5.Then play the game.
See the main lines are basically just suggestions to me.They basically show the most obvious move for openings.Right,I play the book moves allt he time without een knowing.Sorry if this is a critic to the main lines but that is my opinion.
c5 isn't a bad response to d4 actually. I think it's called the old benoni, or something like that.
Could we go back to the topic please? Anyone playing NL?
My knowledge is not bad, I have 100+ books and have played chess for 25 years. But, I don't want to study 25 theoretical moves in the Dragon
The NL is a good system but the transpositional possibilities are fairly noteworthy. I've always felt it's a good system for experienced players that want to 'retire' from opening theory, but still have a good understanding of a wide variety of structures and plans. If you can play anything and don't want to be overly ambitious then it's a good choice.
You don't need theory to play the NL. Just play to clear the central dark squares and everything else will come together.
Exactly the kind of experience I hoped for; thanks. "Retire" is well put. That is exactly what I want, in some sense.
Here is a sample line that I find somewhat non-trivial, though:
1. Nf3 d5 2. b3 c5 3. Bb2 Nc6 4. e3 Nf6
White is of course not forced to play like this, but I like the idea of hitting d5 with c4 at some time. However, here, black gets good play with d5-d4. I guess white should consider a truly reversed Nimzo, with Bb5 ... (Nimzowitsch - Spielmann, 1927)
The DVD by Nigel Davies? Anyone? Seems very promising, according to this http://www.chesscafe.com/cbcafe/cbcafe.htm
thanks for this page
I understand that you're looking for a system that will allow you less study. But for what ultimate purpose? More wins? Because any system you try will eventually land you where you are now - it doesn't always work. Because you get outplayed. Decent players will adapt to anything you throw at 'em. Respectfully, I suggest that if you want more wins, improve your general chess skills instead of looking for a 'winning' (powerful, devious, little known, etc.) opening. Not to negate the discussion, of course. The discussion is interesting. Just saying.
You don't have to "study" and memorize variations to play an opening. Pick a favorite GM who plays 1 e4 and play over his games against the Sicilian, for example - not all at once, a couple at a time. Play over the whole games to the end, no matter who wins or if it is draw. Over time you will get the ideas.
At your level you won't be facing players deeply prepared, and if you do your first move out of their "book" line will confuse them completely - as theirs would you if you wasted your time memorizing. But over time, practice will teach you much more about opening positions and the common strategies and tactics that occur in them than any book will.
If you are scared to play 1 e4 as White because someone may play the Sicilian, or the French, or the Marshall Attack as Black, you won't be able to improve your game much.
I understand that you're looking for a system that will allow you less study. But for what ultimate purpose?
I am surprised; I thought I was very explicit in earlier posts. I want to play a sound opening that is less theoretical than the most popular and sharp mainlines such as 1.e4.
In order to have time for studying endgames and tactics.
(Please don't claim that 1.e4 doesn't require preparation)
You don't have to "study" and memorize variations to play an opening. Pick a favorite GM who plays 1 e4 and play over his games against the Sicilian, for example -
Well, this is exactly what I want to avoid. I am interested in Rubinsteins rook endgames, and in Fischers way of winning minor piece endgames. So I want an opening that gives my an "interesting middlegame" after, say, 5 minutes opening study. In that way, I can develope my playing strenght by studying general chess knowledge rather than opening-specific variations
Interesting that most people seem to think that nothing else than 1.e4 is ok.
Did you guys read Watson's 4 volumes on chess openings? He claimes that all openings are playable, ans essentially equally useful.
If you are scared to play 1 e4 as White "
Please read my earlier posts again.
No problem with 1.e4, in my opinion. It's prob'ly the simplest to learn at your level. Against the Sicilian, just go with the 3. Bb5 lines and you will do fine.
by Billion_Tactics_Boy a few minutes ago
If You were Doing Life Which 5 Books Would You Keep To Make Your game Strong?
by Dodger111 2 minutes ago
Tracking albeit censored
by FromMuToYou 3 minutes ago
by sjarel 3 minutes ago
12/8/2013 - Boxed In
by szammie 4 minutes ago
Is it agaisnt the rules so delay games?
by drvijaysankar 5 minutes ago
what is the advantage of playing the king's gambit accepted?
by Malabrigo 10 minutes ago
Breaking the 1600 barrier (first Danish Gambit)
by Rsava 11 minutes ago
Daily Puzzle 12/6/13-Mate in 3
by Warrior200 11 minutes ago
Does anybody know the chess set that was on The Walking Dead this week
by SFN 15 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2013 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!