1...g6
Your opening repertoire for black?
Against:
1.e4 c5 - The Sicilian defense (Najdorf, Lasker Pelikan variation)
1.d4 Nf6 - Nimzo-Indian Defense or the Queen's Indian.
:)
1. d4: Benoni (same goes for 1.nf3, g3...)
2. e4: Sicilian Najdorf,scheveningen style. (Ok, I got his book and really liked it!)
versus 1. e4, I'll play French! (In fact, I've come to actually welcome the exchange variation.)
versus 1. d4, I'll play the KID. Or do my best to play the KID, without knowing much theory.
versus 1. c4, I'll play the mirrored English, with Nh6-f5 if white opts for the fianchetto variation.
I play only solid openings...
versus 1.e4: The Latvian Gambit, the Elephant Gambit or the Franco-Hiva-Gambit
versus 1.d4: The Englund-Gambit, the Soller-Gambit, the Blackburne-Hartlaub-Gambit or the Baltic Defence
versus 1.c4: The Vector-Gambit
1.e4 -> e6 (French, preferably Winawer)
1.d4 -> f5 (Dutch, depending on White's setup either Stonewall or Iljin-Genevki)
1.c4 -> e5 (2. Nc3 d6 3.g3/Nf3 f5!) (not sure about the name of this system, maybe 'Reversed Grandprix-Attack)
1.Nf3 -> f5 (Dutch, Stonewall only if White plays an early 1.d4, if they go for d3/e4 or d3/c4 then again: Reversed Grandprix-Attack=
1.f4 -> e5! (Froms Gambit, if they transpose to King's Gambit -> Baker's Defence 3...h6)
1.g3 -> e5! (and then go for a Reversed Pirc/Modern Defence if they forget to play c4, otherwise: welcome back to Reversed Grandprix)
Against other White openings -> no theoretical preparation at all, I think normal development and tactically sound play are sufficient for Black to get an equal game.
semi slav variation:
And against e4 you need a third. And against an earlier Nf3 you need a fourth. And even then, I'm not sure that's all the GM-worth deviations that happen merely after the QG beginning.
The point being, the Noteboom can't really be your "d4 defense." It can be one of the many variations you occasionally get to play. But it's a little like basing your e4 repertoire around the idea that you'll be facing exclusively the English Attack.
I play only solid openings...
versus 1.e4: The Latvian Gambit, the Elephant Gambit or the Franco-Hiva-Gambit
versus 1.d4: The Englund-Gambit, the Soller-Gambit, the Blackburne-Hartlaub-Gambit or the Baltic Defence
versus 1.c4: The Vector-Gambit
Solid???
I play only solid openings...
versus 1.e4: The Latvian Gambit, the Elephant Gambit or the Franco-Hiva-Gambit
versus 1.d4: The Englund-Gambit, the Soller-Gambit, the Blackburne-Hartlaub-Gambit or the Baltic Defence
versus 1.c4: The Vector-Gambit
Solid???
man some people need to recognize jokes
The point being, the Noteboom can't really be your "d4 defense." It can be one of the many variations you occasionally get to play. But it's a little like basing your e4 repertoire around the idea that you'll be facing exclusively the English Attack.
Eh, the noteboom really starts after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 e6 4.Nc3 dxc4.
It's a fairly common line; c4, Nf3, and Nc3 are all the most common, natural moves, and there are a bunch of different move orders to get into that position.
It's more like basing your e4 repertoire around the idea that you'll be facing the open sicillian.
I play the french and the noteboom, myself. With some rare lines like the nimzovitch defence thrown in when I get bored.
Against 1. d4: Nimzo-Indian and Queen's Indian
Against 1. e4: Petrov