10787 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!
<Is there any reason to like the c4 position for black more in the okelly than the one for the taimanov when the one for the taimanov has white spend often 3-4 tempis on getting the same structure? Any at all other than your personal preference?>>Definitely, in my opinion at least. The tempi white spends are directed at more than just getting in c4, although c4 is like the cement that makes white's position so convincing against the Taimanov.Of course, what success I've had against c4 speaks for the fact that the O'Kelly seems to suit my style. Quite often there is only one line that frees black's game, quite often based on the advance b5. It is a difficult defence for black to play, having to balance development with counter-attacking possibilities. It is EXTREMELY hypermodern and that quite simply is not to the taste of most GMs, who prefer classical positions because GMs draw on their incredible knowledge of previously played lines.In some variations, black is forced into apparently desperate counter-attacks and in others, black may dominate the centre with his extra pawn. Often the d pawn remains on d7; sometimes black's f pawns are doubled, giving very good chances on the g file, although black automatically goes down a pawn by losing the h pawn. Again, losing pawns isn't to everyone's taste. The opening is extremely dynamic and unbalanced. THAT's why people don't like it. Occasionally black loses, which is only to be expected. There seems to be a VERY low percentage of draws. I like that but you may not! However, if I felt the opening was unsound I'd play something else instead. My second string defence is the Caro-Kan. I think that's WAY less sound than the O'Kelly, but then I'm not an expert on the Caro-Kan.Back to the O'Kelly, GMs don't like it but I'm convinced that sooner or later it is bound to be played and then gain in popularity. They don't like it so they recommend sidetracking it. They tend to believe that 3 d4 is actually a mistake against the O'Kelly but they gave up recommending 3.c4 20 years ago!So ....
In the Regular Dragon, you can get rolled off the board quickly if you don't know what your doing. White's play just seems so much easier...
I actually think the Najdorf (and Scheveningan with Najdorf move order) is easier. Its more positional than the Dragon though. More about the feel for the position than a ton of theory in the Dragon.
And just be aware that you often have to defend for a long time in the Najdorf/Schev...Its not all about attack,attack,attack.
Ftacnik even says that you need to have "knowledge of typical piece manoeuvres, when to defend, when to counterattack. The last of these can take some time and practice to develop, but once you have it, you will truly be the master of an unbreakable defensive system of a lifetime."
It is true that the Dragon is risky at a good level (say, 2400+), but probably no riskier than something like the Modern Benoni or the Pirc.
I will say though, in my 17-year chess career the two openings for Black I've seen that a person can learn very well and play 200-300 points above their level JUST BY KNOWING THE OPENING EXTREMELY WELL are the Sicilian Dragon (not Accelerated, hell no) and the Benko Gambit. I've never played them in my career, but it is simply uncanny how people can learn these two openings and become simply so hard to face. Game after game after game they wheel these openings out in tournaments and get very good-to-excellent results overall. I personally know several players (and I'm talking 2100+ USCF) who use the Dragon or Benko and know it so well and just kill people.
I agree that the Najdorf/Scheveningen are not attacking systems. The Najdorf is dynamic, and the Scheveningen is even a counterattacking system, in my view. These two systems are superior to the Dragon if one takes a long-term view of chess development. But to me (below the titled ranks) there is no doubt: the Sicilian that will bring the best results-per-unit-study time is the Dragon.
Hey, I forgot to mention that since the O'Kelly transposes to the Paulsen in the c4 variation, to say that c4 defeats the O'Kelly is the same as saying that it defeats the Paulsen and nobody thinks that. The Paulsen is played at top levels. Ergo, the argument that c4 refutes the O'Kelly fails.
Hyper-Accelerated Dragon is where it's at .
The average White player trying to castle queenside and "pawnstorm" will be met with a rather violent queenside fate, or will stumble into a tactical trick. Obviously the test is the Maroczy idea, in which case I advocate finding an offbeat, energetic concept on your own (I'm trying out playing for an early f5).
Why black should want to rush to play dragons beats me. The dragon is a pussy.
And the hyper IS unsound.
I play the Dragon for variety; various 2...e6 Sicilians are my alternative to meeting 1.e4. I like the Dragon because its very demanding and taxes your skills at both attack and defence (and typically in the same game). I like that its double edged and can be decided by a single tempo. I don't think its that theoretical when you're playing at the U2000 level either.
That there is a lot of theory in an opening doesn't mean white is going to know it. I doubt class level players know very much the Yugoslav Attack, beyond the main ideas, simply because there's no reason to study it in preference to any other reply from black, unless they play it. Its hardly a fashionable opening anymore.
The Accelerated Dragon is a whole other animal entirely: quieter games where white isn't able to stir much up against black (but neither is black often able to put any real pressure on white's king) and not that much opening theory. A good enough choice for a positional player who wants a solid defence to 1.e4 and doesn't want to deal with much theory.
I always try to play the Sveshnikov but sometimes wind up in a scheveningen but I feel Ok with either one. I need to look at more theory on the Sveshnikov, though
wow... 3 pages of information and suggestions.....thanks to all who made their comments... really thank you...by the way.........actually now i have decided to play the Sicilian Najdorf then transpose it to Scheveningen......The time needed to study the opening ( all the theories ) will not be a problem, by the end of this year ( November and December ) , I can have at least 8 hours a day for chess ( probably 1 hour 30 minutes for the opening ) but the problem is..... will it be too advanced for me????
Honestly, Najdorf scheveninguen-style is quite complicated, but okay, you can try and see what happens. If you feel you're stuck or don't understand what's going on in your games, you can still pick something else later
I have an ebook (based on a book) called Play the Najdorf Scheveningen Style by Emms.
It provides a cmoplete repertoire and in many cases hr provides more than one option for Black.
Some of the lines are pretty tricky and dangerous (for Black!) so the 8 hours/day would come in handy.
you could also try the uncommon but highly logical kan with 4...Bc5: 1.e4 1...c5 2.Nf3 2...e6 3.d4 3...cx 4.Nx 4...Bc5 or you could do 4...a6 5.Bd3 5...Bc5 transposing and on Nc3 you play b5.
Hedgey, where does the bishop go if white plays 5 Nb3 in the Kan you proposed?
To a7 or to e7. Going to a7 is the traditional way (when White usually exchanges with Qe2 and Be3 at some point), but nowadays the retreat to e7 is more popular.
Thought so, otherwise Black gets compromised on the dark squares near his king. I've played both and when I used to have a photographic memory, which sadly I lost, I was able to play a line where black plays to a7 and allows white to take there, recapturing with the rook. Black is able to conjour up a strong central attack, which went exactly according to some grandmaster game, move for move.
Well as far as I know it's the best book available that covers the opening you said you wanted to play.
And I don't believe in this whole rating police. This isn't the Kremlin. It's only a game. It's not like I'm telling a 5 year old who just learned to read to go to the library and provide a deconstructive analysis of The Marchant from Venice.
If you're ambitious enough and willing to put in the effort then I don't see why not. The book is fine, you don't have to memorize all the lines in it.
P.S. I recommend 1...e5
Truth is this is a technical book (almost no verbal explanations) on an already very tough variation. So, sure, the OP can try it and make his own opinion, but let's say he wouldn't be choosing the easiest path by doing so...
Honestly, this book is probably a waste of time for someone who is relatively inexperienced in chess, but everyone is free to make his choices...
by winerkleiner a few minutes ago
Is there a chess opening that pisses you off?
by FriendlySquid a few minutes ago
by Fixing_A_Hole 4 minutes ago
Darth Vader Opening
by Fixing_A_Hole 5 minutes ago
Accuracy of ratings
by Fixing_A_Hole 14 minutes ago
Any Books on Playing the Sämisch variation Against the KID
by JohnStormcrow 15 minutes ago
12/9/2013 - Mate in 3
by im_joe 16 minutes ago
Pirc victory at the center
by Fixing_A_Hole 23 minutes ago
Simple basic chessboard for following instruction.
by kleelof 26 minutes ago
select pieces style globally
by Carl_Magnus 26 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!