You play KG when u want a result, u play QG when u want a draw, simple
Actually, the QG gives better chances to play for a win as it is more complex and gives White a lot of different options. In the KG Black has all the options.
Yes that's right.
@Stil1 - yeah, maybe. I'm not sure where your numbers come from, but I'll take your word on it. I doubt, however, that we'll ever see the KG in something like the Candidate's or the WCC, unless Ian loses his mind and busts it out in the blitz section of a tiebreak. It could happen. He is a big fan of the KG. I would pay money to see it, even! But I don't think it's going to happen.
Someone right this minute could be refining an antidote to black's play after 3. Nf3 or refining out the wrinkles from 3. Bc4. It's really possible that it will occur in something like the Candidate's or more likely, the WCC, because whoever is doing it certainly won't give it away and they'll keep it for a very special occasion. Yes, I think we'll see the KG again at the very highest levels.
@Stil1 - yeah, maybe. I'm not sure where your numbers come from, but I'll take your word on it. I doubt, however, that we'll ever see the KG in something like the Candidate's or the WCC, unless Ian loses his mind and busts it out in the blitz section of a tiebreak. It could happen. He is a big fan of the KG. I would pay money to see it, even! But I don't think it's going to happen.
Someone right this minute could be refining an antidote to black's play after 3. Nf3 or refining out the wrinkles from 3. Bc4. It's really possible that it will occur in something like the Candidate's or more likely, the WCC, because whoever is doing it certainly won't give it away and they'll keep it for a very special occasion. Yes, I think we'll see the KG again at the very highest levels.
I hope you're right! And I hope we see the KG real soon in the WCC, like tomorrow!
I love Fabi, but puh-leeze, not another draw-a-thon! I don't think that's likely with Nepo, though. Wouldn't it be hilarious if he actually played a KG...... in the first game!
You play KG when u want a result, u play QG when u want a draw, simple
That... is nonsense. You really think todays top grandmasters are all playing for draws when they play the QG?
A lot of people don't understand that sharp e4-e5 openings like variations of the Italian and the KG are drawish. It's a result of pawn formation symmetry, quite often. There's less symmetry in Queens Gambit games and hence more chance of a positive result.
I would argue that if you follow the Nf3 lines of the KG, you tend to get a lot of symmetry, but the Bishop's Gambit lines are practically never symmetrical. This is possibly why the BG lines tend to be more popular at the highest level of play than the Nf3 lines (both Polgar and Fischer, yes Fischer, preferred them). There's nothing symmetrical about this game that I played a few weeks ago and nothing symmetrical about any of the BG variation games that I've played.
A lot of people don't understand that sharp e4-e5 openings like variations of the Italian and the KG are drawish. It's a result of pawn formation symmetry, quite often. There's less symmetry in Queens Gambit games and hence more chance of a positive result.
The classic QG exchange of cxd5, exd5 gives each player a sphere of the board to engage their various attacking plans.
Remember, there are no boring openings, just boring players.
I would argue that if you follow the Nf3 lines of the KG, you tend to get a lot of symmetry, but the Bishop's Gambit lines are practically never symmetrical. This is possibly why the BG lines tend to be more popular at the highest level of play than the Nf3 lines (both Polgar and Fischer, yes Fischer, preferred them). There's nothing symmetrical about this game that I played a few weeks ago and nothing symmetrical about any of the BG variation games that I've played.
fascinating game
A lot of people don't understand that sharp e4-e5 openings like variations of the Italian and the KG are drawish. It's a result of pawn formation symmetry, quite often. There's less symmetry in Queens Gambit games and hence more chance of a positive result.
The classic QG exchange of cxd5, exd5 gives each player a sphere of the board to engage their various attacking plans.
Remember, there are no boring openings, just boring players.
I try my best to be boring.
A lot of people don't understand that sharp e4-e5 openings like variations of the Italian and the KG are drawish. It's a result of pawn formation symmetry, quite often. There's less symmetry in Queens Gambit games and hence more chance of a positive result.
The classic QG exchange of cxd5, exd5 gives each player a sphere of the board to engage their various attacking plans.
Remember, there are no boring openings, just boring players.
I try my best to be boring.
Lulling your opponent into a state of somnolence is a legitimate strategy.
@optimissed - when you play the Bishop's Gambit, you have to have nerves of steel and be able to live with the fact that your king is going to spend much of the game alone on the second rank. Black's reaction is almost always "this is unsound and I'm going to punish it" but the truth is that it's remarkably hard to pin down the king. Half the time, neither team ends up castling and pure chaos erupts on the board. If you can weather the kingside attack, your pieces are better positioned for the late middle game.
Do I always weather the storm? No, but it's always fun, and honestly that matters much more to me.
I found KG is very fun and agressive in many lines. QG is like chilling and waiting for opportunity to win positionally.
A lot of people don't understand that sharp e4-e5 openings like variations of the Italian and the KG are drawish. It's a result of pawn formation symmetry, quite often. There's less symmetry in Queens Gambit games and hence more chance of a positive result.
The classic QG exchange of cxd5, exd5 gives each player a sphere of the board to engage their various attacking plans.
Remember, there are no boring openings, just boring players.
I try my best to be boring.
Lulling your opponent into a state of somnolence is a legitimate strategy.
Hence QG and Sicilian with e6 and a6. Both positionally very sound. No playing e5 in the Sicilian unless it's demanded by the position. No 0-0-0 in the QG. Just build and exert gentle pressure in both.
I found KG is very fun and agressive in many lines. QG is like chilling and waiting for opportunity to win positionally.
Tactically. White attacks either directly against black's king or on the Q-side, but builds a favourable position first instead of trying to attack from an equal position, so it's more effective than the KG.
@Stil1 - yeah, maybe. I'm not sure where your numbers come from, but I'll take your word on it. I doubt, however, that we'll ever see the KG in something like the Candidate's or the WCC, unless Ian loses his mind and busts it out in the blitz section of a tiebreak. It could happen. He is a big fan of the KG. I would pay money to see it, even! But I don't think it's going to happen.
That'd be fun to see, for sure. I'm guessing (hoping) the match will feature some unusual/exciting openings, besides the normal fare.
I use this database: https://old.chesstempo.com/game-database.html
At the top right corner, you can select the ratings range. The stats for each opening obviously change, depending on the ratings level.
You can play through (or click through) to find your opening variations. On the tab below, you can click on "Games for Position" if you'd like to explore more. (Click on W ELo or B Elo to sort games by rating ...)