Well, the breyer is the better option in my opinion.
Safe and can be sharp.
U can play it without much theory, playing with plans.
Larry Kaufmann in his repertoire for black and white is perfect.
Synthetic and useful to begin and even mastering Breyer.
Then, if u want more, Bologan mass book on Ruy Lopez, with double repertoire : Breyer/Marshall, but this is so huge to learn...
Thanks poucin, great answer. I think I have Bologan's book - but I found it very hard work.
Just curious as to why you wanted to learn ...e5 lines? Not exactly something one would choose for the excitement. :P
In my experience, when playing for the win against a lower rated player the Sicilian is ideal... But if you want something solid against a 2300/2400 then 1..e5 looks to be a more solid choice. This is all just my opinion, of course.
@blitzcopter, 1...e5 is crucial for developement as a chess player.
Also true... The lines are so rich in theory, from what I have seen so far
I agree, I'm playing ...e5 to learn. Maybe the OP's case is different, since he's already an expert.
1...e5 is probably the most popular move at beginner and grandmaster levels - should definitely not be underestimated
The Zaitsev... if you don't mind playing a (somewhat) inferior line to avoid the dreaded Ng5 draw.
The Marshall is way too much memorization, albeit the easier to play- strategic plans are very clear and straightforward.
The Berlin is very difficult to handle, positionally speaking- for both colors.
The Breyer is close to the Zaitsev regarding ideas- a bit more solid, and less ambitious. The good thing with it is that you can play it without much memorization, and it has good reference material: not just Kaufman, but also Bologan, Ntirlis, Eljanov, Avrukh...
What do you think about the open variation?
Thanks pfren - just what I was looking for.
@blitzcopter, 1...e5 is crucial for developement as a chess player.
Primarily I was asking why an attacking/tactical player would look more toward ...e5, not that no one needs to understand it.
Personally I would likely perform reasonably with ...e5 (against reasonable opposition), but it tends to lead to rather dry positions that don't look that fun (and I am not a particularly sharp/dynamic player). Certainly ...e5 is very viable but it may not be to everyone's taste.
From what I've seen so far, the Breyer appears to be the best choice for me.
does anyone have any preference for the Berlin?
@blitzcopter, dry positions??? I am a french player, but I take the time everyday to play through some open games just so that I could see the vast expanses of positional and tactical ideas.
@chessmaster, I dont know if you know about this, but you can play the Marshall without studying all the dense theory by not playing the ...c6 line. Instead ....Bb7 and ...Nf6!? are very playable and bypasses a lot of theory in my opinion. ...Bb7 is not as wild as the ...c6 line. ....Nf6 was Marshall's original idea preparing an aggresive ...Ng4 after ...Bd6. But I dont know if this is favourable at your level of play.
@HolyKing - I am really playing 1...e5 in order to achieve solid positions and unfortunately white can gain a nice edge against ...Nf6, I seem to recall. Thanks for your suggestion though.
Yup, then the mainlines should be best.
I don't know much about the Marshall, but Marshall's original Nf6 is at best really sketchy. Mainlines look tough though!
@HolyKing: well, not in every line, of course, but White can kind of dictate the craziness of the position, but my impression is that few strong players go for the really open stuff.
@blitzcopter, 1...e5 is crucial for developement as a chess player.
Primarily I was asking why an attacking/tactical player would look more toward ...e5, not that no one needs to understand it.
Personally I would likely perform reasonably with ...e5 (against reasonable opposition), but it tends to lead to rather dry positions that don't look that fun (and I am not a particularly sharp/dynamic player). Certainly ...e5 is very viable but it may not be to everyone's taste.
What is that "attacking, tactical player"?
Mainly an abomination of players on the fine details of chess - which are yet too complex for them to understand.
When I was 16, I played this game:
While I felt pleased for winning a stronger opponent this way, somehow I was not very pleased for missing a few not-so-difficult lines. I was looking for spectacular moves, and missed some simpler, and more effective ones.
A few months later I had the luck to attend a few courses with a Greek IM, Pavlos Gesos. His first advice was studying a few selected games by great masters, and apply more positional flavour in my games, because he estimated that it suited my (still primitive) playing style best.
I faithfully followed his advice and 3.5 years later, I became FM. I was better at positional subtleties, and also significantly more accurate at tactical chess. Oh- and for the record, by the time I became FM, I was opening with 1.d4 almost all the time... blame it on Iron Tigran. Of course I was never able to reach something remotely reminiscent of his playing skill, but I have mastered chess much better by studying his games- his openings included, of course.
hi guys!
So baisically I am a 2100 ELO player who has played the Sicilian his whole life, and now wants to develop a repertoire around 1...e5. Against the Ruy Lopez/Spanish, I have been examining the Breyer, Marshall and Berlin Wall - wonder if you guys could recommend which one would best suit my tactical, attacking style without having to learn loads of theory immediately in order to start playing it.
any book reccomendations related to the above openings would also be appreciated.
thanks,
harry.