Aggressive Forcing Opening?
Sort:
Sep 3, 2019
0
#3
How about gambits? They usually lead to wild positions with lots of opportunities for traps or gaining dynamic advantages early on. You're opponent maybe accurate and you're down material in the early stages, but if you out prepare him, this could be the imbalance you're looking for. Against this guy, i imagine myself playing the blackmar-diemer or scotch gambits as white. As black, I'll go with the Icelandic gambit (against e4) and the Budapest gambit (against d4)
Sep 3, 2019
0
#4
How about gambits? They usually lead to wild positions with lots of opportunities for traps or gaining dynamic advantages early on. You're opponent maybe accurate and you're down material in the early stages, but if you out prepare him, this could be the imbalance you're looking for. Against this guy, i imagine myself playing the blackmar-diemer or scotch gambits as white. As black, I'll go with the Icelandic gambit (against e4) and the Budapest gambit (against d4)
“I’ve seen more promising players lured into incompetence by this opening than I care to remember. The basic pattern is this - player learns [the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit], tries to get it in every game, thus limiting his chess experience (and, since the opening isn’t good, he loses too many games, meaning that his rating stays low and he can’t get games against better players). Nobody who plays good chess plays this line, and nobody who plays good chess ever will.” - IM Sam Collins (2005)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627031504/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen76.pdf
Sep 3, 2019
0
#7
kindaspongey wrote:
“I’ve seen more promising players lured into incompetence by this opening than I care to remember. The basic pattern is this - player learns [the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit], tries to get it in every game, thus limiting his chess experience (and, since the opening isn’t good, he loses too many games, meaning that his rating stays low and he can’t get games against better players). Nobody who plays good chess plays this line, and nobody who plays good chess ever will.” - IM Sam Collins (2005)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627031504/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen76.pdf
Interesting. Do you know what it is specifically about the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit that causes this? Is it that white players keep trying it and don't get the position and then have to play down material or another reason?
Sep 3, 2019
0
#8
BMAli wrote:
... I require an aggressive opening ... that can hopefully get me to a winning endgame in about 20-25 minutes with two slow moving players.
If such an opening existed, why wouldn't every GM play it?
Sep 3, 2019
0
#9
blueemu wrote:
BMAli wrote:
... I require an aggressive opening ... that can hopefully get me to a winning endgame in about 20-25 minutes with two slow moving players.
If such an opening existed, why wouldn't every GM play it?
Good point. I'll elaborate more. Basically I'm looking for an opening that is more where someone who doesn't know the opening will make a mistake or blunder in the opening because they don't know the opening and the mistake/blunder seems like a logical move. GMs would know the opening and wouldn't do it on each other as the mistake wouldn't come.
BMAli wrote:
kindaspongey wrote:
“... Nobody who plays good chess plays this line, and nobody who plays good chess ever will.” - IM Sam Collins (2005)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627031504/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen76.pdf
Interesting. Do you know what it is specifically about the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit that causes this? Is it that white players keep trying it and don't get the position and then have to play down material or another reason?
Sorry, I don’t really know much about this. I just remember seeing the quote. I think many opening books don’t even mention this gambit, but, on the other hand, quite a few people seem to like to play it. Might be worthwhile to think about how well you are likely to know what you are doing if you go for this. After 1 d4 d5 2 e4, you might get 2...c6, so you have to be ready for a Caro-Kann. There is also 2...e6, going into French territory.
The Evans Gambit is really pretty solid for a gambit, but then it requires the opponent to play a pretty specific defense, and Bc5 is not seen as often as it once was.
If you are serious, I would just try the Danish Gambit...it definitely suffers at higher ratings, but:
- If you are playing a beginner who is aggressive/offensive-heavy, it will surprise them and if they accept it they will be playing defensively trying to maintain their 2 pawn advantage.
- A beginner won't know that giving one pawn back right away is the best defense.
- All the opponent has to play is e5 to your e4 to ensure you can play it.
- If they don't accept the gambit, they are conceding the center to you.
Sep 3, 2019
0
#14
blueemu wrote:
BMAli wrote:
... I require an aggressive opening ... that can hopefully get me to a winning endgame in about 20-25 minutes with two slow moving players.
If such an opening existed, why wouldn't every GM play it?
because they don't want you to know the well kept secret. they only play it in private unrated tournaments where the winner gets to wedgie the rest. true chess players never really cared about ratings or money.
Indeed. I personally feel that no one should expect their opponent to fall into traps n tricks nor would I advocate such an attitude. There are no such "secret weapons" in my experience. Every opening has their own merits and most importantly your repertoire should reflect your own personal chess philosophy as a stand alone going forward. Building your repertoire by due diligence and skillful acumen. Not depending on your opponent to falter by mere chance. THAT being said. , heh...I like, of course, ponz's suggestion of adopting the Ponziani Opening. In live or OTB games it can be a killer. In Daily, not soo much but its solid enough after the initial fireworks. However, I recommend the KG. If anything. Best wishes😉
I have a big game upcoming. I am playing against a guy who is accurate with moves but doesn't know much opening theory. However due to the competition where we are playing we have 30 minutes and if no-one has won a decision is made on the board position, so I require an aggressive opening that is preferably quite forcing (so not much to learn in terms of position) that can hopefully get me to a winning endgame in about 20-25 minutes with two slow moving players.