Spaasky as in Boris Spaasky, ex-World Champion, lost to Bobby Fischer in the 1972 World Championship. Fischer played Alekhine's Defense in their match and won, if I recall correctly.
I'll cast my vote for the Caro-Kann, but I'm biased. Really, really biased.
no one mentioned the latvian gambit or elephant gambit?
French. No question.
wearing the stat / trainspotter hat i would say the the first move is sufficient to gain advantage so black cannot equalise
>:)
latvian doesnt equalise, it loses...
FM Andrew Karklins has been playing the Latvian for decades, with good results.
He he maybe he would be a GM if he played something else.
1. e6! seems to work ok :) It is all a mater of taste. Just play something that your comfortable with and that you understand.
Do you respect the Morra Ozzie?
Respect would be the wrong word. I think of the Smith-Morra as one of the many shortcuts that people can take, where they sacrifice study time for an inferior position. Therefore it's probably one of those openings which artificially caps your rating, which in general I don't think are a good idea. But some other people have made the interesting point that you should play such openings early on, specifically so that you learn about tempi, attacks, and active piece play. So I guess it has it's merit.
Maybe I usually see it being played from a position of weakness instead of a position of strength.
GM Milan Matulovic played the Morra for many years with great success ;)
The less people respect Smith Morra, the better for us.
the Alekhine, which also offers great practical chances.
Not what the original poster asked. Of course everyone champions their own personal choice but that isnt necessarily the safest/most solid equalizer (I wish I could convince you to take up the portugese variation of the scandinavian but I don't see that happening). I think its a matter of personal taste and style but the caro or assorted lines after 1...e5 (Berlin, Bc5 italian, etc) would be a good place to start.
I think that it is more exceptional to find an opening where using old theory is ok than the reverse.
the Alekhine, which also offers great practical chances.
Not what the original poster asked. Of course everyone champions their own personal choice
I don't champion my personal choices, chess would be a very boring game if everyone played the same openings.
really:S whys that? Do you find the Ruy exceptional then? Hasnt that had the same theory for years?
In the Ruy, you really have to split it up. The Berlin is a completely different opening than what Karpov played in the late 80s against Kasparov. I think that for the Breyer you'd be right and it's got a slower change velocity, but I think that for the Marshall and Berlin that they're higher.
However, you've got to know the refutation of the Cochrane Gambit.
Is there such a thing? And if so, what is it? And in which line -- Nc3 or d4?
I thought that was just threadbaiting.
the apocolypse attack is very strong against the caro-kann
what is this?
the apocolypse attack is very strong against the caro-kann
what is this?
I think this is it? It doesn't look too strong, though.
Ruy Lopez
the apocolypse attack is very strong against the caro-kann
what is this?
I think this is it? It doesn't look too strong, though.
not strong at all
One thing makes me curious here.
Why do you want to settle for equality, there is no such thing in chess anyway the dynamics change with every move, you want a defence that recognises that.