Best defenses the Reti - Chess Forums - Page 2

IMKeto

Jan 3, 2019

0

#21

dantewitt wrote:

Wow, I’m controversial. 😎

Thanks for the tips, all.

I almost always play the Reti as white, because it’s flexible and it’s supposed to be as good as any - and I like the name. 😉 But I don’t have much experience playing against it.

Continue to be a rabble rouser, that's how change happens.

ThrillerFan

Jan 3, 2019

0

#22

kindaspongey wrote:

ThrillerFan wrote:

… Also, this whole thing about trying to compartmentalize variations between "aggressive" and "defensive" is utter horsesh*t as well. ...

"... you must choose what openings you will be using. This choice depends on your taste and also on the character and style of your game. If you like to attack and you are not afraid of sacrificing and taking risks choose sharp gambit openings. If you prefer a quiet game, then there are relatively calm openings for you. ..." - Journey to the Chess Kingdom by Yuri Averbakh and Mikhail Beilin

Ok, you play 1.e4 e5 2.f4, thinking you will get some super sharp Muzio Gambit. Black plays 2...Bc5. Good bye sharpness. Precisely why you should not categorize.

Slav is positional, right? 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 dxc4 5.e4. Good bye positional game!

All openings require that you be able to deal with both sharp and dull positions.

ThrillerFan

Jan 3, 2019

0

#23

Ashvapathi wrote:

IMBacon wrote:

Ashvapathi wrote:

IMBacon wrote:

Ashvapathi wrote:

IMBacon wrote:

You should be more concerned about following opening principles, not hanging material, and not missing simple tactics, before trying to be "aggressive"

Why do beginners think being "aggressive" is more important than the basics???

Because aggressive tactical openings give them a chance to practice tactics and mating ideas.

More poor advice.

If beginners just play 'solid' openings (particularly closed positions), they have no idea what to do other than move the pawns and pieces randomly. And they never get a chance to practice tactics and mating ideas.

Opening moves are not "random" moves. Their is an idea behind them. Just like playing "tactical" openings is poor advice, since any opening can be "tactical" As far as all this "open" and "closed" positions stuff that us constantly paraded around here? More poor advice. Just because a beginner/lo rated player is told to play "open positions" doesn't mean a whole lot, if they don't understand why they are to play open positions. It all gets back to my first 2 sentences.

1. Opening Moves serve a purpose.

2. Their is an idea behind opening moves.

If you don't understand points 1-2, then playing open positions wont help. And blindly playing 1.e4 because it leads to open positions is poor advice, if the person doesn't understand "why"

Take a look at pretty much any position on tactics trainer. You will notice similarities, and common themes for the winning side:

Space advantage.

Material advantage.

Piece Activity.

Weaknesses in the opponents position.

What did Fisher (I believe) say: "Tactics flow from a superior position."

How do you get a superior position?

Piece activity.

Space.

Smart pawn use.

Create/force weaknesses.

It's a myth that people 'understand' openings. No one 'understands' openings or positions (or similar positions). People(from beginners to professionals) memorize openings or positions. When you think you understand an opening or position, it is just that you have seen that opening or position so many times, you can remember it's various continuations without effort and it feels like you 'understand' it. Beginners don't have that kind of exposure to openings or positions and they don't want to memorize openings or positions specially if the variations are long and do not give any decisive material advantage.

About 'superior' positions: there is no such thing as superior position without first pointing out the players involved. It means the evaluation of positions is not independent of players. Good or bad position depends on players as much as the position itself. So, when you advice beginners playing against other beginners, you have to provide them with openings or positions which have the maximum potential for success and learning for them.

PS: De La Maza

De La Maza is a complete and utter idiot! He barely scraped 2000 one time after a lucky performance at the World Open and retires. He is not good enough to publish books.

Read the following! An IM points out the truth about this Maza clown!

http://www.jeremysilman.com/shop/pc/Rapid-Chess-Improvement-77p3511.htm

ThrillerFan

Jan 3, 2019

0

#24

dantewitt wrote:

Wow, I’m controversial. 😎

Thanks for the tips, all.

I almost always play the Reti as white, because it’s flexible and it’s supposed to be as good as any - and I like the name. 😉 But I don’t have much experience playing against it.

Uhm, you can't always play the Reti. It depends on Black's moves as well.

1.Nf3 c5 2.c4 is NOT a Reti

1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 without d5 is NOT a Reti. It can end up an English or King's Indian, but not a Reti.

kindaspongey

Jan 3, 2019

0

#25

ThrillerFan wrote:

kindaspongey wrote:

ThrillerFan wrote:

… Also, this whole thing about trying to compartmentalize variations between "aggressive" and "defensive" is utter horsesh*t as well. ...

"... you must choose what openings you will be using. This choice depends on your taste and also on the character and style of your game. If you like to attack and you are not afraid of sacrificing and taking risks choose sharp gambit openings. If you prefer a quiet game, then there are relatively calm openings for you. ..." - Journey to the Chess Kingdom by Yuri Averbakh and Mikhail Beilin

Ok, you play 1.e4 e5 2.f4, thinking you will get some super sharp Muzio Gambit. Black plays 2...Bc5. Good bye sharpness. Precisely why you should not categorize.

Slav is positional, right? 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 dxc4 5.e4. Good bye positional game!

All openings require that you be able to deal with both sharp and dull positions.

"Building a repertoire ... we will take the idealized situation of someone starting from square one ... The first step is to think about your personal style. Do you prefer open, tactical positions or closed, strategic positions? Does an attack on your king make you nervous, or are you happy so long as you have a counter-attack? Do you prefer main lines, or something slightly offbeat? Next, look at the various openings available, and see which ones fit in with your personal style. ..." - GM John Nunn (1998)

ThrillerFan

Jan 3, 2019

0

#26

kindaspongey wrote:

ThrillerFan wrote:

kindaspongey wrote:

ThrillerFan wrote:

… Also, this whole thing about trying to compartmentalize variations between "aggressive" and "defensive" is utter horsesh*t as well. ...

"... you must choose what openings you will be using. This choice depends on your taste and also on the character and style of your game. If you like to attack and you are not afraid of sacrificing and taking risks choose sharp gambit openings. If you prefer a quiet game, then there are relatively calm openings for you. ..." - Journey to the Chess Kingdom by Yuri Averbakh and Mikhail Beilin

Ok, you play 1.e4 e5 2.f4, thinking you will get some super sharp Muzio Gambit. Black plays 2...Bc5. Good bye sharpness. Precisely why you should not categorize.

Slav is positional, right? 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 dxc4 5.e4. Good bye positional game!

All openings require that you be able to deal with both sharp and dull positions.

"Building a repertoire ... we will take the idealized situation of someone starting from square one ... The first step is to think about your personal style. Do you prefer open, tactical positions or closed, strategic positions? Does an attack on your king make you nervous, or are you happy so long as you have a counter-attack? Do you prefer main lines, or something slightly offbeat? Next, look at the various openings available, and see which ones fit in with your personal style. ..." - GM John Nunn (1998)

You can quote others all you want. They are glorified comments to appease the beginner. I don't believe in appeasing. I believe in the truth. And the truth is, it doesn't matter what you do, you will have all kinds of positions. There are French games that end up open and double king pawn openings that end up extremely closed.

Fischer said that he might have to admit that the French Winawer was sound, but yet he doubted it, claiming it was anti-positional and weakens the Kingside. If all you are doing is spouting quotes, then you would have to claim that the French Winawer is unsound. You try telling that to someone like Wolfgang Uhlmann!

Might as well cut to the chase rather than beat around the bush!

kindaspongey

Jan 3, 2019

0

#27