What is your style?

Attacking? Tactical? Positional? Describe your style.

Mine personally starts out agressively and then it transistions as the game progreeses from Postional to Defensive the most.  Other wise I am a great attacker.

Openings are my strongpoint. Few players can lay a trap or get an opening advantage against me, except when I get experimental.

Through the middlegame, however, my play tends to be be mystical. I want to see what I can do at the board, but make it difficult for my opponents to see what I am doing. Not in terms of skill but in terms of style I'd compare myself to Bent Larsen, Zukertort and Reti.

To quote an earlier post of mine:

"I'm a somewhat balanced player who prefers positional games and plans but will play the board and adjust how I play based on the position as some positions are static, others dynamic. I don't like making risky pawn sacs for the sake of a few tempi if there are safer alternatives, but once in a long while (and that's because I don't believe most of these to be sound) I'll make a positional sac but not to create a brilliancy or anything. I play for the win as everybody does but I don't mind draws as long as I feel I've played well, though too often I'm in a completely winning endgame and I make too many mistakes because it's complicated and just agree to a draw. But still most of my games are won based on tactical errors, though there are ones where I have built up crushing positions, some I pushed home, and some I ruined if in time pressure. I have to work on making tactical pawn breaks (like in the benoni, I generally can't see why e5 makes a good pawn sac but in books I see it so often, it must be because not only do you have to calculate but often you have to asses a position 5 moves deep without moving pieces!)."

And I love to study openings. Knowing the philosophy behind certain openings makes you a better strategic player. And of course when you actually play the opening, you generally have an advantage since you probably are more experienced with the opening than your opponent and get into nice active positions that you already know how to play.

Another fine idea for a thread. In a way, I like to think of my style as liquid-esque lol. It sort of reflects my M.O. in life. I tend to avoid dramatic ends of the spectrum, and tend to enjoy myself more when I stay in the middle. So it goes with chess. I do a fair amount of studying, but am not a "specialist" in any particular area. Jack of all trades, master of none lol.

At the end of the day, I am definitely more of a positional player, though I do so enjoy the occasional lethal tactic:)

Here is a recent game of mine from a thematic K.I.D. tourney. This is the only time I have ever actually gotten a windmill off lol.But the game is somewhat representative of my style. No frills, no spills (usually:))

I am trying to work on excelling in very complicated positions, but I am still not  very strong in those situations yet. That's why I have taken to the Ruy Lopez. 

yes gxt, lopez lines are deep, and can get sticky. I have personally stopped trying to play them. Trying to develop my Queens pawn games at the moment.

Complicated lines can be quite fun to analyze, but ultimately I prefer more simple, clearly defined positions where I can slowly build up a plan. I guess I don't like small mistakes to be punished badly, but rather an overall bad strategy being punished by a better one. And for some reason I'm starting to love 1 d4 openings for white and black. Love the french too.

Elubas, I've found the majority of 1 d4 openings to be like you have described. I spent a number of years, when I was first learning to play, trying to make 1 e4 work for me. It never did. I switched after three years and instantly starting winning about 20% more of my games. Even better, my brother-in-law gave it a back-handed compliment once when, after several successive loses as Black, he exclaimed, "I hate when you play that move". Obviously, any particular branch or line can get tactical/complicated, so there is no way to always mold play in the direction you want it to go. I think, however, that the old distinction between 1 e4 as leading to somewhat more tactical and 1 d4 as leading to somewhat more positional play has some merit if taken as a general trend. I don't know if it is just the way I play my openings, but I feel like I always wind up with a space advantage as White when playing 1 d4. This suits me just fine as it is a long-term advantage that can often be counted on when developing a plan. Perhaps the stability of the central pawn structure is what allows for the kind of planning you and I prefer? Certainly the French has an extremely stable structure that typically lasts into the endgame, which may explain (although it isn't a d4 opening) why it might be appealing to you to play as Black. Good luck in d4 land.

I too find that when you open with 1 d4 and play it properly you get an advantage to nurse, and it often is a space advantage. If black tries to create too many complications, usually it ends up compromising his position. Not only do I like the positions that come out of the french and d4, I also feel that most people (especially attacking players) hate to see these moves as they can't seem to break them down and have to instead find a long term plan.

um i am not sure maybe someone can look at my live games and tell me. :D

I prefer positional play to tactical play.

I absolutely love the Queen Pawn opening and the Dutch Defense.  I also like the King's Indian Defense too.

As black, when I'm confronted with 1. e4, I either play c5, going into the Sicilian, or c6, going into the Caro-Kann.

I do not like playing against 1. e4, as I know it can get into some serious tactical battles.

If I were to play to win the game at hand, I would simplify. If I want to try to develop the skills needed to win in the future (or if I'm bored), I try to complicate.

i personally love the ruy lopez like the late great Bobby said e4 is the best to test true its harder cause its been used so many times that every position has been looked at and solved ten times over so your almost always gonna end up in the endgame but endgame is my favorite part especially if i still got both my bishops they are my favorite pieces in the game for to many reasons but if you slip ill crush your dreams with my knights in the open, my strongest open tho

I like to play tactical attacking games and complicated games.

Calculation is actually not one of my strong points, which is evidently a pretty bad thing for my style of play, but I have decent intuition. My other weaknesses are positional play, endgame, evaluating positions, not caring enough about material, and playing way too many openings.

Here's the last standard game I played online, I was Black and gave up several pawns pretty early on (yes the h7 pawn was a sacrifice too) and then all of a sudden he resigns, in 21 moves.

I definitely didn't calculate to the end, i just felt like I'd get a decent position with some venom.

Wow, that was pretty sharp play as Black. Nice commitment to the attack.

I'm more a positional player than a tactical one, but lately, I've been playing e4 and whenever I get, one of my favorite openings: the King's Gambit.  Here's a game I've won with it.