Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

What's your favorite/most recommended chess opening?


  • 19 months ago · Quote · #21

    JWestlake

    I play 1. e4:

    - Ruy Lopez

    - Open Sicilian (English & Yugoslav Attack)

    - 3. Nc3 in the French

    - Panov-Botwinnik vs the CK

    - Grab a big center and push aggresively against the pirc/modern/owen etc.

     

    With black I usually play a Ruy against e4 and I haven't found any opening system I really like against the other opening moves, so I mix it up.

     

    All my opening knowledge is from using a database in correspondence chess anyways.

  • 19 months ago · Quote · #22

    EricFleet

    HurricaneMichael1 wrote:
    Fromper wrote:
    EscherehcsE wrote:
    livluvrok wrote:

    I need to learn some new openings

    It might be prudent to question that assumption.

    Agreed. Livluvrok's rating here on Chess.com is under 1300. At that level, it doesn't matter what opening you play, since your opponents won't stick to "book" moves, anyway, and your study time is best spent elsewhere.

    Just stick to 1. e4 as white, and push a center pawn two squares on your first move as black (whichever center pawn won't get captured immediately), and that's all the opening repertoire you need.

    If you want to study something to improve, skip the openings, study tactics, and read Chernev's "Logical Chess: Move by Move". That book teaches opening principles, along with principles for other parts of that game. That's what you need, not specific moves.

    Ugh, he might become better if he plays good openings.

    I am only recently studying opening theory and have done pretty well. Learn to play chess, then refine your understanding of the principles by studying old opening theory and then move into more recent.

  • 19 months ago · Quote · #23

    dragonair234

    I've heard that king or queen pawn opening (one after the other, either order) is the strongest opening. How true is this? 

  • 19 months ago · Quote · #24

    Fromper

    HurricaneMichael1 wrote:
    Fromper wrote:
    EscherehcsE wrote:
    livluvrok wrote:

    I need to learn some new openings

    It might be prudent to question that assumption.

    Agreed. Livluvrok's rating here on Chess.com is under 1300. At that level, it doesn't matter what opening you play, since your opponents won't stick to "book" moves, anyway, and your study time is best spent elsewhere.

    Just stick to 1. e4 as white, and push a center pawn two squares on your first move as black (whichever center pawn won't get captured immediately), and that's all the opening repertoire you need.

    If you want to study something to improve, skip the openings, study tactics, and read Chernev's "Logical Chess: Move by Move". That book teaches opening principles, along with principles for other parts of that game. That's what you need, not specific moves.

    Ugh, he might become better if he plays good openings.

    Umm, no. Not at that level. What's the point of learning to play a good opening if you're just going to blunder and lose in the middle game and end game? Until you reach intermediate level (maybe 1500 OTB, or 1800 on this site), you shouldn't study openings at all. Learn basic opening principles, like what's in the Chernev book I recommended, but don't worry about specific move orders.

    Besides, if he's playing against opponents at his own level, then they won't follow the "book" moves anyhow, so he'll have to improvise early and often. So he won't even get a chance to use those book openings.

  • 19 months ago · Quote · #25

    varelse1

    Fear_ItseIf wrote:

    Its difficult to pick a favourite, but probably the trompowsky:

    1.d4 nf6 2.bg5  The opening itself is quite rare, though completely sound. The reason it is rare is because it is = with bet play from black, therefore it is somewhat neglected at top level.

    This keeps the game firmly within your repertoire, rather than 2.c4 when you must learn all the other players systems.

    I was stationed in Britain in the early 90's, and due largely to the influence of Adams, everybody was playing the Trompowski.

    And by everybody, I mean the taxi driver, the bartender, the kid delivering newspapers.

  • 19 months ago · Quote · #26

    Fromper

    HurricaneMichael1 wrote:
    Fromper wrote:
    HurricaneMichael1 wrote:
    Fromper wrote:
    EscherehcsE wrote:
    livluvrok wrote:

    I need to learn some new openings

    It might be prudent to question that assumption.

    Agreed. Livluvrok's rating here on Chess.com is under 1300. At that level, it doesn't matter what opening you play, since your opponents won't stick to "book" moves, anyway, and your study time is best spent elsewhere.

    Just stick to 1. e4 as white, and push a center pawn two squares on your first move as black (whichever center pawn won't get captured immediately), and that's all the opening repertoire you need.

    If you want to study something to improve, skip the openings, study tactics, and read Chernev's "Logical Chess: Move by Move". That book teaches opening principles, along with principles for other parts of that game. That's what you need, not specific moves.

    Ugh, he might become better if he plays good openings.

    Umm, no. Not at that level. What's the point of learning to play a good opening if you're just going to blunder and lose in the middle game and end game? Until you reach intermediate level (maybe 1500 OTB, or 1800 on this site), you shouldn't study openings at all. Learn basic opening principles, like what's in the Chernev book I recommended, but don't worry about specific move orders.

    Besides, if he's playing against opponents at his own level, then they won't follow the "book" moves anyhow, so he'll have to improvise early and often. So he won't even get a chance to use those book openings.

    I followed that crap rule and I was awful, I started studying openings and I started getting better and I'm still getting better.  Any just so you know it is 1400 (Chess.com ratings) that is the cut off line for beginner and intermediate.

    If you want to waste time studying openings instead of taking the advice of every single master, grandmaster, and chess coach EVER, who all agree that studying tactics will improve your game faster than anything else, then go for it.

    As for your arbitrary cutoff between beginner and intermediate, I have no idea where you got that number from, but I won't argue with it. My point was that you should be a pretty strong intermediate player before you bother with openings. And even then, you should still spend at least 90% of your chess study time studying pretty much everything else in chess if you really want to improve.

  • 19 months ago · Quote · #27

    Fromper

    Yes, I am saying not to studying openings at all. At least, not until you reach a decent intermediate strength of play by studying other areas. Learn some opening principles, and go from there. That's all you need.

  • 19 months ago · Quote · #28

    livluvrok

    @Fromper: what do you reccomend me working on the most?

  • 19 months ago · Quote · #29

    Fromper

    Google Dan Heisman's Novice Nook column, and read his article entitled "The Four Homeworks".

  • 19 months ago · Quote · #30

    mattyf9

    I think the various responses this thread has received just further proves the point that a beginner player should not be learning multiple openings.  There's dozens of openings that are playable.  Its all a matter of what you like to play.  Pick one and learn it really well.  Don't memorize move orders.  Learn the ideas behind the moves and understand why they are the best moves.  Outside of that study tactics.  Learning many different openings will not improve your chess.  It will only confuse you while you play as soon as your opponent plays a non book move.  

  • 19 months ago · Quote · #31

    Steve212000

    I like to play the Benko Gambit. The idea of going for queenside pressure is exciting and easy to set up. Lots of fun!

  • 19 months ago · Quote · #32

    Steve212000

    HurricaneMichael1 wrote:

    Play the Slav Defense (ECO A10) against the Queen's Gambit.

    Have you had a chance to study Anand's new line yet?

  • 19 months ago · Quote · #33

    _36darshan--

    d4

  • 19 months ago · Quote · #34

    Steve212000

    _36darshan-- wrote:

    d4

    R2D2.

  • 19 months ago · Quote · #35

    abiogenesis23

    Sicilian, Ruy Lopez, Kings Indian, Grunfeld.  

  • 19 months ago · Quote · #36

    Yereslov

    I have no idea what this is.

  • 19 months ago · Quote · #37

    Steve212000

    I also like the Mora,and Gorhing gambits. ;p

  • 19 months ago · Quote · #38

    SmyslovFan

    Post #43 is a Nimzo-Indian. It's basically the Saemisch Variation (E24) of the Nimzo, but 7.f3 looks bad. Why didn't black play 7...Qh4+ instead of the abject retreat?

  • 19 months ago · Quote · #39

    SmyslovFan

    Here's a line that makes more sense against 5...Ne4. It was analysed on another site.



  • 19 months ago · Quote · #40

    Steve212000

    hoynck wrote:

    @livluvrok & others.

    It does not matter that much what you choose. Pick some you like at first sight and study them. Play over mastergames, look at a video, read a book, ask a friend and last but not least try them in online chess. Analyze your first games with an new opening afterwards and use a database as reference. You can also anlyze your games with (free) software available.

    All the best and success.

    Good point.That makes a lot of sense,for anyone less than 2,000. ;p


Back to Top

Post your reply: