14053 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!
I usually like to play on the queen side, was wondering which openings generally favor attacking on that side.
BONUS Q: Which black openings especially play on the kingside, I only know that KID usually attacks on kingside
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 c5 3. d5 b5
Normally there is a main line with c:b5 a6 b:a6 B:a6
And then Black plays moves like d6 g6 0-0 Qa5 Nbd7 Rfb8 and has a huge amount of pieces in the queenside
You can't generalize like that.
Case in point:
King's Indian - Black often attacks Queenside in the Four Pawns Attack and Saemish Variations, and occasionally attacks queenside in the Bayonet Attack (especially 9...a5 lines)
French - The theory of pawn pointing in Blocked positions indicates Queenside activity for Black, but there's also that f-file!
Opposite Side Castling - Even here you can't generalize. While the Dragon often leads to opposite side Castling, so does the 5...Qb6 6.a3 c4 line in the Advance French and guess what? White Castles Kingside, Black Queenside, but yet, because of the pawns, White attacks Kingside and Black attacks Queenside.
There are 64 squares on the board. You must use all 64, otherwise you'll fall in the category of 90% of other chess players - Utter Failures!
Other common generalities that I see WAY TOO OFTEN that lead to failure if you favor one over the other:
1) Bishops vs Knights - I favor whichever minor piece is better for the given situation - those that specifically favor the Knight or the Bishop will continue to fail!
2) Systematic Players - Those that "play the same move no matter what the opponent does" doesn't understand chess. Let's say you play the London System. If you play 1.d4, and I answer 1...g6, and you respond 2.Nf3, and I respond 2...Bg7, and you respond 3.Bf4, and you are then asked why you played 3.Bf4, and you respond "Well, because that's what the London System says to play", then you clearly have no clue as to the point behind the London System, and anybody that truly understands the London System would realize that the Modern Defense is probably the lone defense that the London System doesn't even equalize for White against, and that White should play something else against the Modern Defense.
I think you've misunderstood the question. What I'm looking for are openings that attack on the queenside. Whether you think that players that are more comfortable playing queen side is bad chess - that opinion is irrelevant to me. The generalization that King's Indian mainline generally favors kingside play, is true. Maybe when you go into specific variations from the mainline, like 4 pawn or Saemich, then those exceptions might prove the generalization wrong. But those are specifics, and thats why generalizations are general, non-specific. Maybe you'd have an easier time understanding the question, if you answered the question like each variation was a different opening, procedurally they are. Then you could say generalizations like KID-Mainline generally favors kingside play, while KID-Saemich generally favors queenside play.
In no way have I misunderstood the question. The question, however, is a bad one to answer because one of the worst things a chess player can do is pre-meditate what he's going to do. I don't ever base openings that I play on the pre-destination that I will get a Queenside attack, Kingside attack, Tactical game, Positional game, etc, and saying that the King's Indian leads to kingside play 87.19% of the time while the French leads to Queenside play 74.56% of the time, making them into "generalizations", is ludicrious.
I've had Positional Najdorfs, Tactical Slavs, King's Indians where White attacks Kingside, and Frenches where White attacks Queenside. Generalizations are the worst thing one can use in chess. Generalizations should be reserved for players rated below 1000 and strictly used for piece value. However, once you get to my level (over 2100 over the board), generalizations mean sh*t, and I strongly discourage others from going on generalizations outside of the extreme basics, like not moving the Queen early, not moving pieces multiple times during opening development, etc. Give me a Tactical game with the Slav Defense where Black attacks Kingside and his Bishop dominates White's Rook!
Chess is about the specific position at hand, not generalities.
The Modern Benoni aims for an unbalanced position where black has a majority on the queenside.
Thrillerfan is right. Chess is about finding the weakness in your opponents position and attack it no matter where this weakness is.
Often when you attack on the queenside your opponent can manage to seal the weakness there only to displace his pieces on the kingside. As a result you have to attack on the kingside.
Check for example this classic game between Spasski and Fisher: http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1044727
It is a benoni so typical play on the queenside however Fisher is not dogmatic and because of the white piece placement attacks on the kingside. Spasski is forced to defend the kingside but as a result he is left with a knight on c3 (instead of the more active field c4). Fisher reacts by attacking on the queenside. Once again Spasski manages to block the black queenside initiative however at the cost of some weaknesses also his pieces are now not well placed to defend the center to Fisher breaks trough the center. Spasski manages to stabize the center but only now the queenside weakness starts to count and black finishes the game on the queenside.
In no way have I misunderstood the question. The question, however, is a bad one to answer because one of the worst things a chess player can do is pre-meditate what he's going to do.
I never said I was going to move irrespective of what my opponent said. But there are players that play opening because they provide certain opportunities. Thank you for letting me know you're at 2100s, no one asked, but even higher rated GMs know how to play all the openings, they usually have preferred openings. Like I said, the question was never "What is your opinion on preferring certain openings", you've answered a question that was never asked lol It's funny that you pull out your rating like we're measuring our e-peen here, there are certain things that involve chess knowledge, but this has to do with common sense. When someone asks you the time, you don't say you think it's useless to track time because time is relative, you just give them the time.
Whatever, you are an utterly useless 1300 player that obviously has no interest in learning the game and improving.
To the rest of you 1300 players out there, before you think I'm stereotyping, being 1300 doesn't make you utterly useless, being a stubborn little brat that likes to talk back and not accepting the facts from someone 800 points higher than you is what makes you utterly useless.
Moonnie understands exactly what I'm saying in the previous posts on this thread. Roder_toro obviously doesn't, and obviously doesn't care to. He just wants us to confirm his one dimensional thinking skills, find players that will go along with his faulty logic, and satisfy his bad chess habits.
And by the way, GMs don't choose their openings on the basis of which side they attack. Different minds think differently, and there are a bajillion factors that determine what is the best opening for you. Understanding the resulting pawn structures is probably the most critical. Understanding where the pieces go is next (it ain't always towards the center). In many cases, generalities don't do you a lick of good! Case in point...I posted a game in the Show and Tell area (or whatever that section is called) titled "A Complete Annihiliation in the Catalan", and in the note to Black's 7th move, it mentions Black's best line against what I played, and counter-intuitive to most human minds, Black actually should give up a pawn, and then proceed to place the Queen on b7, with the Bishop still sitting on c8! White won in 41 moves, but was probably resignable for Black by move 26.
As for your telling time analogy, it's a horrible comparison. Comparing telling time to understanding chess is like comparing how to dribble a basketball to how to beat Michael Jordan in his prime.
Also, your time analogy confirms my point. Chess is about specifics. If you ask me the time, I tell you that it's 2:42pm. I don't go around stating generalities like "It's the afternoon".
French - Queenside & Classical Dutch Kingside.
roder_toro: Heed what ThrillerFan tells you regarding the danger of pre-meditating, even if his delivery is caustic.
To answer your inquiry about achieving play on the queenside, not all Sicilians fit the bill. The Sveshnikov often involves kingside play. The Najdorf is more likely to result in black attacking on the queenside, especially if white castles 0-0-0.
khrestianovskii is absolutely correct about the Benko Gambit. The Benko Gambit gives black play on the a and b files.
Do Americans tend to flame more on live chess
by incantevoleutopia a few minutes ago
I need suggestions to suprise my opponent today.
by Chess_Troller 2 minutes ago
Annotated GM Games Online
by achja 3 minutes ago
Can you spot vishy?
by madamedhivya 4 minutes ago
by Jason3000 4 minutes ago
Why I Like ICC
by BoardOfWar 11 minutes ago
Is there any chance that a 1300 rated player can beat a 2700 rated player?
by Milliern 17 minutes ago
gg = Rub It In?
by Khallyx 19 minutes ago
Pieces do not move
by JackAboutChess 21 minutes ago
by Jason3000 27 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!