Any good weapons against the french?

Sort:
Refrigerator321
Ultimate-trashtalker wrote:

Bro that's going to take forever....play 5 10+5sec rapid

We were doing all this talking while ultimate trashtalker literally changed countries

pleewo

should I play an opening that I know nothing about because I feel it would put the most pressure

Refrigerator321

Jesus christ literally every fide rated player uses some form of theory in some of those games it's not an addicting vice is a normal thing that is necessary once you get above the 1223 daily level

Refrigerator321

You can have prep, and still be exceptional in the middlegame. That's how magnus and ding and ian and hikaru and fabi and wesley so and literally every gm does it

Sea_TurtIe

people at my level are trying to put you out of theory as soon as possible (they havent ever even been in theoretical territory before_

PedroG1464
8thMarch2023 wrote:

I feel like prep is a short cut and it's harmful to your ability.

Absolutely not. Openings are a way to find your preferred style of chess and steer the game into a direction you like more. If you play the Queen’s Gambit, you’re aiming for a more positional game, which is entirely in the style you play. If you play the Sicilian, you’re aiming for a more dynamic game, which is also entirely in the style you play. Either way, theory is a way to channel that and create your middlegame plans. Theory is not a shortcut.

Sea_TurtIe

its funny what i used to play when i knew 0 theory and first started playing chess at 700 elo

i would play like this

i had no idea what i was doing at this time but i liked it

Sea_TurtIe

also i loved the kings gambit when i first started chess, it was enchanting to me, i didint know it was called that but i thought that giving away a pawn for the center was smart and good

PedroG1464
8thMarch2023 wrote:
TheSampson wrote:
8thMarch2023 wrote:

I feel like prep is a short cut and it's harmful to your ability.

Absolutely not. Openings are a way to find your preferred style of chess and steer the game into a direction you like more. If you play the Queen’s Gambit, you’re aiming for a more positional game, which is entirely in the style you play. If you play the Sicilian, you’re aiming for a more dynamic game, which is also entirely in the style you play. Either way, theory is a way to channel that and create your middlegame plans. Theory is not a shortcut.

If you feel that way then you should have challenged me to a rated game instead.

What’s the difference, then? To prove I’m “manly”? I knew there were Andrew Tate stans on chess.com.

pleewo

You should also play me in blitz fr

Sea_TurtIe

andrew tate is not a bad person but he definitely has some interesting opinions

as a person who believes in free speech i have no issues with him and support him

pleewo

I mean i may not be a fan of his character but the messages he’s spreading definitely aren’t negative

PedroG1464
8thMarch2023 wrote:
TheSampson wrote:
8thMarch2023 wrote:
TheSampson wrote:
8thMarch2023 wrote:

I feel like prep is a short cut and it's harmful to your ability.

Absolutely not. Openings are a way to find your preferred style of chess and steer the game into a direction you like more. If you play the Queen’s Gambit, you’re aiming for a more positional game, which is entirely in the style you play. If you play the Sicilian, you’re aiming for a more dynamic game, which is also entirely in the style you play. Either way, theory is a way to channel that and create your middlegame plans. Theory is not a shortcut.

If you feel that way then you should have challenged me to a rated game instead.

What’s the difference, then? To prove I’m “manly”? I knew there were Andrew Tate stans on chess.com.

I suggested people challenge me to 14 day rated games.

If playing from prep is a good thing you should have nothing to fear.

In rated games, I feel like anxiety brings me down. In unrated games, I feel much more comfortable. Thank you for asking.

pleewo
8thMarch2023 wrote:
TheSampson wrote:
8thMarch2023 wrote:
TheSampson wrote:
8thMarch2023 wrote:

I feel like prep is a short cut and it's harmful to your ability.

Absolutely not. Openings are a way to find your preferred style of chess and steer the game into a direction you like more. If you play the Queen’s Gambit, you’re aiming for a more positional game, which is entirely in the style you play. If you play the Sicilian, you’re aiming for a more dynamic game, which is also entirely in the style you play. Either way, theory is a way to channel that and create your middlegame plans. Theory is not a shortcut.

If you feel that way then you should have challenged me to a rated game instead.

What’s the difference, then? To prove I’m “manly”? I knew there were Andrew Tate stans on chess.com.

I suggested people challenge me to 14 day rated games.

If playing from prep is a good thing you should have nothing to fear.

I’m just fearing dying of old age before the games end

CheerUpChess-Youtube

I suggest the Tarrasch variation (Nd2). I can teach you the whole opening and everything you need to know about it. My winrate against the french is about 70%.

pleewo

Tarrasch is very solid

PedroG1464

Nc3, Advance, and the Tarrasch are by far the best responses to the French.

JoeMamaForever420

Tarrasch is fine.

There's also this gambit

mirroredragon

merits of theory: you win the game more often

and thats all i have to say

PedroG1464
8thMarch2023 wrote:
mirroredragon wrote:

merits of theory: you win the game more often

and thats all i have to say

I don't know theory and I have, so far, won 100% of my games.

Your claim that knowing theory would make me win more often, or even could have, at least in this snapshot, is objectively false.

You’ve only played 20 games, most of which you were by far the better player.