13253 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!
As white, I like the Italian, or the London System.
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 :)
I think I can comment on your situation since I seem to have travelled pretty much the same road as you have-- gave up on 1. e4 back in '84 when I realized I couldn't beat the old Super Connie with the open games -- that's what got me into the Colle in the first place. I have played all the openings you have mentioned and had the greatest success with 1. c4; but even now, that seems to be getting harder to win with.
I prefer 1. b3 because of it's more flexible nature, but your choice can't be bad. Although I did get annoyed with some Black replies to 1. Nf3, such as 1. ...Nc6 and 1. ...d6.
I am always searching for the opening "nirvana" -- the place where I choose my few openings and stay with them, yet I never do. I've probably switched openings 100 to 200 times in the last twenty years!
I like the hypermodern openings with White alot, yet they seem ponderous at times. My latest clever plan was to play 1. b3 all the time, but I can't seem to do just that because it is a bit boring-- and seems to require alot of positional knowledge, some memorization, and playing for an even position.
I would play 1. Nf3 all the time ( I think) if everyone would cooperate and play 1. ...d5 to "help" me!
Although I did get annoyed with some Black replies to 1. Nf3, such as 1. ...Nc6 and 1. ...d6.
I like the hypermodern openings with White alot,
Hi, thanks for this. So, I am not alone.
I wonder if it really is such a bad idea to switch openings often. Sure, there must be some cost for it, but I believe there is also some benefit in terms of getting hands-on experience with very different kinds of positions. Hence, getting deeper positional understanding. Perhaps.
I would go into 2.d4 after 1...Nc6, and maybe (probably) even play 3.Bf4. Against 1...d6, I would consider going 2.e4 (!) to get a classical Pirc (or Modern). I kind of like those defences as Black, but I think I could imagine to play against them too. A restrained approach is hard to meet as Black.
Thanks for the other suggestions too; e.g, London is underrated I think. I very much like it against 1...d5. It is not clear to me how to best play against the indian defences, however. Maybe going into a Torre.
Everyone is overthinking this. Just pick an opening and play it a lot, so then we can have extra time for other areas of chess study.
I personally have little to no respect of the Nimzo-Larsen Attack or Larsen's Opening. I beat a 2447 in August 2010 (the only player I've ever beaten over 2300, though I have many draws to 2300+) with Black against Larsen's Opening. The inclusion of 1.Nf3 doesn't prevent e5. Black can play an early d6, and go for a reversed closed sicilian setup, as White will likey play c4 at some point.
I say stick with 1.e4 or 1.d4. If you hate the 30+ move book lines of the Sicilian, do like Spassky did and play the Closed Sicilian as White vs 1...c5.
What is with all of these self proclaimed masters that refuse to play games on chess.com and to take the free membership by revealing their title? I don't get it..
First off, I don't claim to be a master. I claim to have beaten masters. I personally am an expert (FIDE rating in the 2050s).
Secondly, the better players play on ICC, and internet ratings are garbage anyway compared to over the board ratings. My FIDE rating is in the 2050s. My Internet Blitz Rating is in the 1700s.
I've got 1900+ on both ICC and here on chess.com. I actually like playing the Nimzo-Larsen, though only because I enjoy catching people off guard in blitz games. I fully admit it basically throws away the first advantage, but I don't think you beat that master merely because of the opening. You had a great game; he had a poor game. It's perfectly reasonable to expect that he would beat you 9 times out of 10 even if he played 1.b3 every time.
At any rate, I don't fear the early e5 from black. Two of my personal favorite lines are 1.b3 e5 2.Bg2 Nc6 3.e3 d5 4.Bb5 Bd6 5.f4 and 1.b3 Nf6 2.Bb2 g6 3.Bxf6 exf4 4.c4 Bg7 5.Nc3. I also really enjoy when black tries to play e5 followed by f6, whereupon I play e4 instead of e3 and immediately play for the d4 break in the center. Another line I enjoy is when black plays for a reversed Nimzo-Indian. I go all out for their king, most often employing a rook lift from f1 to f3 to g3 or h3. It's very fun to play these lines in blitz (at least I enjoy them). About the only time I diverge is when black tries to get conservative and plays a semi-slav structure. From there, I like to switch gears and play a Colle-Zuckertort, which goes excellent with a 1.b3 repertoire.
Anyway, I could go on and on, but I just wanted to take issue with the "I beat a master because 1.b3 sucks". It's not great, but it certainly doesn't create a losing position by any means. That concept belongs to the person playing a bad game.
Chess isnt all about opening. There is still the middlegame and endgame.
I agree. This is why I want to avoid getting commited to theory-heavy main lines. I prefer to read a middlegame book, or study endgames.
When I say I look for a reasonable opening, I mean more than just something for internet blitz. I talk about finding something that is good enough for several years, in OTB games. With some practical bite, but slightly off-beat.
I am currently playing NL, and Torre ("perfect opening as white for club players" [Silman]).
Today, it is acually Torre. I kind of like it. It can't be *that* bad, "only for club players" [someone, on internet] since I see games in the database by Yusupov, Kamsky, Spassky, Dreev, Van Wely, Salov, Timman, Piket, Larsen, Miles... (!!).
Is it possible that there are psychic chess masters?
by reflectivist a few minutes ago
1 Minute Time control checkmate.
by erikzambrano 2 minutes ago
Concerned about trolling, again
by waffllemaster 3 minutes ago
How to become a staff member
by sayusan 3 minutes ago
How do you clean Vinyl Chessboard?
by InoYamanaka 5 minutes ago
We need more amateurs to post their annotated games.
by chasm1995 11 minutes ago
by Expertise87 11 minutes ago
Where is IM Pfren???
by royalbishop 12 minutes ago
Why do women get different medals? WGM or simply GM?
by Elizabeth_Teri_Baker 12 minutes ago
by craftysusie 13 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2013 Chess.com