Advice for a limited time chess player.

Hi,

I'd like some advice on openings for the black pieces for a limited time chess adult. While I've settled comfortably with my white opening (London), I'm still unsure what openings to utilize with the black pieces. Keep in mind I am a player with limited time on my hands who is looking for more forcing openings or low theory/utilized openings so I can narrow my opening study time. I've been utilizing the Scandinavian defense for awhile and I like it ok, but I'm open to other alternatives. I'm still in the dark for something forcing against 1.d4. Would the Dutch be something to look at?

Thanks for helping me out.

against d4 the QGD or QGA wont require too much theory, The queens gambit accepted is the choice for you i think. And against e4 the french is an opening where you don't need to learn to much theory, just know your lines and ideas.

Forcing openings automatically means more theory and more studying. Nature of the beast. For someone with limited study time, I would suggest the following as options. Not saying play all of these, but it is a list that does not include openings with a ton of theory (I.e. Najdorf):

Against e4:

1...e5, playing the Petroff against 2.Nf3

Caro-Kann

Rubinstein or Fort Knox French with something against the advance and exchange.

In comparison, avoid the following: Dragon, Najdorf, Winawer French, Pirc

Against d4:

Old Indian (great book that came out last year, covers all you need on the old Indian in a single volume)

Stonewall/Classical Dutch (Winning with the Stonewall Dutch, published by Gambit in 2008, is excellent - explains when the Stonewall is right and when you need to go classical - contrary to belief, the Stonewall is not playable against everything 1.d4 and black gets a horrible game in many cases)

Orthodox QGD - while having been around for ever, there actually is less theory here than say, the Tartakower QGD.

In comparison, the following are loaded with theory and should be avoided in your case:

King's Indian, Grunfeld, Nimzo-Indian, Modern Benoni, Semi-Slav, Leningrad Dutch, etc.

Go for Scandinavian v 1 e4 and Stonewall against 1d4 or 1 c4. Stonewall has some similar plans to the London and with these 2 easy to learn openings you dictate to white what you are going to play from move 1.

Thanks for the advice. Since I'm playing the London as white I'm hoping to play different structures as black so I can advance my understanding of more positions over time. I'll have to look over those suggestions later when I have time to use Google. Thanks!

 

Keep in mind the Stonewall can't be used as an "all encompassing" defense to 1.d4.

 

First off, if Black can fianchetto the Bishop to b7, he should.  The stonewall should be a last resort.  This is why White plays an early g3.

 

For example:  1.d4 f5 2.Nf3 e6 3.Bf4 e6 4.e3, the move 4...d5 is a total mistake, and Black should instead fianchetto his Queen's Bishop, and the pawn will likely to go d6 eventually to stunt the scope of the f4-Bishop.

 

After 1.d4 f5 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nc3 e6 4.Nf3, the move 4...d5 is also a huge error and Black should instead play 4...Bb4 here, resulting in an improved version of the Nimzo-Indian.  The problem with 4...d5 is 5.Bf4!, 6.e3!, and 7.Bd3!  If White is able to play Bf4 and Bd3 without structural damage to his pawns, Black can't play the Stonewall and expect to not be lost. 

 

So additional items;

 

...c6 shouldn't be played until White has played c4.  Keep the pawn on c7 to take on d6 if White trades Bishops.

 

DO NOT EVER allow White to trade Dark-Squared Bishops without wasting a lot of time to do it unless it does structural damage to white (i.e. 1.d4 f5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 e6 4.Nf3 d5 5.O-O Bd6 6.c4 c6 7.Bf4 (the main alternative to 7.b3), here Black can play 7...Bxf4 and damage White's pawns.  Black can also allow a trade on d6 if he can still take with the c-pawn, but scenarios where White plays "Bxd6 Qxd6" are HORRIBLE for Black.

 

If White plays an early Nh3, like 1.d4 f5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 e6 4.Nh3 (4.c4 should be answered by 4...c6, not 4...d5), then Black should switch gears and play 4...d6, going for e5, and playing the classical variation, taking f4 away from White.  4...Nh3 d5?! is good for White.

 

 

Again, if you are going to take the Dutch approach, you need to get "Winning With the Stonewall Dutch", which thorough explains when the Stonewall should be played, and when to either fianchetto your Queenside, play the Classical setup, or play the Improved Nimzo-Indian setup.

I'm assuming that Stonewall book is:

Win With the Stonewall Dutch by Sverre Johnsen, Ivar Bern, Simen Agdestein

Sounds interesting. Good Amazon write-up.

I've been reading Moskalenko's "Diamond Dutch" and liking it, though it's somewhat over my head and seems idiosyncratic to Moskalenko chess philosophy. It doesn't address basics like when to fianchetto queenside as ThrillerFan mentions.

 

Yes, that's exactly the book I'm referring to, and would suggest reading it first, for a solid foundation, and then using the Diamond Dutch book to expand knowledge rather than using it to learn the Dutch for the first time.

 

I actually plan on getting "The Diamond Dutch" for additional information, but The Diamond Dutch is probably not the best book to start studying the Dutch because it covers the entire Dutch (Leningrad, Stonewall, Classical, Oddball stuff) and also is totally objective, not a repertoire.  This is more the type of book that a seasoned Dutch player should read for additional information.

Would the Queens Gambit Declined Orthodox (QGDO) defense be better for my chess understanding than the Dutch?

If I chose the QGDO as my reply to d4 would I then need a third opening to reply to 1.c4, nf3, and other openings moves besides 1.e4/1.d4?

 

The QGD follows general principles better than the Dutch does, and if a beginner asked me which I would honest recommend between the two, I would say the QGD, and after they got a solid foundation, maybe expand with the Dutch to see if A) They understand it, and it's differences from the QGD, and B) if it matches their style of play.

 

As for other answers and other stuff you'd need to know against c4 and Nf3?  You would need a line against the Reti, and being a QGD player, you'd need to know something about the Catalan.

 

After 1.c4, you can answer 1...e6.  If 2.Nc3, then 2...d5 and White has nothing better than 3.d4, directly transposing to the QGD.  However, White can play 2.Nf3 instead of 2.Nc3 or he could also do 2.g3, but that will usually transpose directly to 2.Nf3.  The same can happen after 1.Nf3 d5, White plays 2.c4 and you play 2...e6 (there are other lines, but to stay consistent and not fall into a transposition to an opening you don't play, this move would be best), and White can play 3.g3 (which the 2.g3 lines often lead to in the English) or 3.b3.  He could also play 3.d4, but many don't with this move order.

 

As for the Catalan, that's 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.g3 or 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3 d5 4.Bg2 intending 5.Nf3 and 6.O-O.  Not many amateurs play the Catalan, but it's highly popular at the GM level.  I myself have played both the Catalan and the Main Lines as White.

 

The last line you'd need to know is the Exchange Variation of the QGD (i.e. 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.cxd5 exd5 5.Bg5)

well my thought is that a "time limited" chess player shouldn't be remembering/memorizing extensive chess theory.

 

but your at 1700 blitz.  that might make a difference. perhaps even you definition of "time limited" might be different.

someone that is hanging simple peices at 800 blitz is surely Well-advised- if he is told to train on tactics, and not to memorize theory, right?

anyways, even Magnus says he doesn't obsess on theory.  if the WCC can get away with not analyzing every potential novelty- perhaps the advice still holds to a 1700 blitz player.

Against 1.d4, how about a Mexican Two Knights Tango 1...Nf6 2.c4 Nc6?  Richard Palliser has a book on it.

I was also wondering about a Schmidt Benoni 1...c5.  If White responds 2.d5 this closes the centre, so there is less of a danger of sudden tactical blows.

Against 1.e4, there are things like the Nimzowitsch Defence 1...Nc6.  James Schuyler has a book called the Dark Knight System, and there is a slightly older book by Christoph Wisnewski.  This would probably get quite a few of your opponents out of book early.

The Sniper is another somewhat rare opening that you might be able to use to get your opponents thinking early 1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.Nc3 c5.  There is a book by Charlie Storey.

 Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.
― Groucho Marx

ha! more theory.  you guys would switch openings, starting a player all over again, to SAVE time?

high level chess is weird.

Thanks, I'll look into this more. I learn openings best by hands on with a bit of master games reviewing. I definitely don't plan to spend a lot of my limited time on opening study. That said, I'm trying to keep my openings somewhat varied so I'm learning to play a wider range of positions. I will look into the QGDO in reply to 1.d4, so I'd really be interested in an opening reply to 1.e4. Is there an opening that can be lower theory but still hold a more natural development approach? I like how the Scandinavian Defense is pretty forcing initially but I think it strays from the basics a bit more than is probably good for a still budding chess player like me. Thanks for the help all!

The french is good, I learned it by playing intuitively, so that may suit what you are looking for.

Try this one against 1. d4

I played the French before but I'm not really up for having all my positions fighting to get my c8 bishop in the game. What about the Alekhine Defense in reply to 1.e4?

How about playing chess 12 hours a day? 10 hours a day? 6 hours a day? You can't? Don't waste your time.

Sveshnikov recommends Alekhine's Defence in his A Chess Opening Repertoire for Blitz and Rapid.