Building my Solid Opening Repertoire (Fischer's)

Since I mainly look over Fischer's games, I thought I should adopt his openings - for now. It will certainly help me play the openings (my greatest weakness) more confidently, rather than spend 30 minutes of my clock trying to "not lose". This is until I am fairly comfortable enough to try out other openings and play out my own variations.

I've been over some of the openings, and I can say I like them, although I don't want to play them over like a zombie.

Although, an issue I'm having is actually understanding the positions and plans after the openings, which will make me waste another 30 minutes of my clock "reading" the position, and MAYBE playing to the right plans.

Here I have the list to my opening repertoire, which is the same as Fischer's.

Please provide any details you can for the opening. (E.g The plusses and minuses, and the general plans revolving around the position for both white and black)

White

1.e4

1...e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 (Ruy Lopez)

1...e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 (Petroff's Defense/Russian Defense)

1...e6 (French)

1...c5 (Sicilian - Nadjorf - Primary)

1...c6 (Caro-kann) --The opening I least understand

1...d6 (Pirc's Defense)

1...Nf6 (Alekhine's Defense)

1...Nc6 (Nimzovich Defense)

1...d5 (Scandinavian) --Also have trouble with this one

Black

1.e4 c5 (Sicilian - Najdorf - Primary)

1.d4 Nf6 (King's Indian Defense)

1.c4 (English) --Any opening outside of e4/d4, I try to steer towards that

1.Nf3 (Reti)

1.Nc3 (Duns't)

1.g3 (Benko)

1.f4 (Bird)

1.e3 (Van't)

Simple Example:

1.e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxc4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 g6 (Dragon) 6.ect ect

White eventually long castles, and initiates an attack on the right wing,

while black short castles and initiates an attack on the left wing.

Thanks for any help!

I recommend you don't take anything StupidGM says seriously.

You seem to be one who actually wants to improve, and I don't want you to be held back by paying attention to StupidGM.

His last post in this forum (so far) does not seem to be a troll post. But I've read enough of his posts to know that he says a lot of nonsense but makes it sound real. If he visits this thread again, be aware of the possibility.

Thank you guys for the replies!

@btl1230 I don't mind playing main lines. 

@StupidGM For now I'm not trying to construct the "perfect repertoire", just something to help me pass the openings. Then yes, after a few years I'm sure I will be replacing some or all with my style.

@Iogozar I'll keep that in mind

@Morphysrevenges I'm going through his "My 60 games" book and I agree, seems quite sharp, but I don't mind. Sharp positions will help me calculate better

For more info on stupidGM, please visit this link (provided by IM Pfren)

Which line is that?
I don't think fischer plays 3.e5 in any of his games, and he tends to not stick with a main line, so Caro-kann is kind of floating empty for me.

Panov Botvinnik attack is worthwhile in my opinion, if you like playing with an isolated queen pawn. There is a rather drawish endgame in one of the lines, but White has winning chances (as Fischer showed in his game with Euwe).

The advance variation was not considered dangerous in Fischer's time, though nowdays it is a mainline.

Exchange variation is good enough for equality, and white can often play for a kingside attack in the carlsbad pawn structure if he knows the correct plan.

3.Nc3 or 3.Nd2 is probably the most critical try for an opening advantage in my opinion.

If you want to copy Fischer's repertoire, study his games and try to remember the opening ideas.

@logozar I just looked up Panov Botvinnik Attack variation, it seems it transposes to a queens gambit variation, if I'm not mistaken, which I have no knowledge in theory as white

3.Nc3 does look promising though

That's the plan. But as I've mentioned I'd like to know the fundamental plusses and minuses in the openings, as well as the plans from both sides to get a better idea of whats going on.

Fischer occasionally played the Two Knights against the Caro-Kann (1. e4 c6 2. Nc3 d5 3. Nf3) but never really had much success with that line. I'm a bit surprised that he never played 2. d3 and 3. Nd2 against that opening, with a King's Indian Attack formation, given that he sometimes favored the KIA against the French (eg: Fischer vs Myagmarsuran, Sousse Interzonal 1967) and against the 2. ... e6 Sicilian.

I noticed that as well on chessgames.com. I can't necessarily look at his lost games

Never heard of a 2.d3 vs a caro kann ..is that some sort of a reverse opening?

I play Bird occasionally as white, and if you happen to face it as black, I can tell you that for me, as white, the biggest issue in my Bird games has always been how exposed the white king becomes. It might not seem like much - after all, only the f-pawn has moved, and it moves to f4 in a lot of other openings as well - however, since in Bird you play f4 at the very first move, your opponent has a lot of room for action to take advantage of that. So, if you face Bird in your games, be aware of this weakness and try to develop your pieces in a way that might let you exploit white's king openness. Queen-side fianchetto, for example, may be a good idea throughout the opening, and definitely create a strong central counter-play, but do not close the center, so there is always a possibility to open it and punish white for exposing his king.

I know, this isn't of much help in terms of theory, and I'm also far from the greatest player on Earth... But Bird is an opening that few people really know, and knowing some of its aspects can set aback a player hoping to surprise you with 1. f4.

It's a King's Indian Attack (a reversed King's Indian Defense). One idea is to arrange your moves to transpose into this sort of opening:

... except that Black has already committed himself, on move 1, to playing ... c6 instead of ... c5. The ... c6 move is usually combined with ... Bf5, but in this move order (1. e4 c6 2. d3 d5 3. Nd2) Black never has the opportunity to play ... Bf5.

By the way, it is a good idea to sometimes play openings you expect to face by yourself. For example, if you don't normally play French, but in your white games you encounter it frequently, then it will help to play it as black from time to time, to know first hand what issues black tends to face there. This is the reason I try to play all strong openings I've heard of from time to time: you understand an opening much better if you've experienced it from both ends, than if you keep playing it only as white or only as black and cannot relate to your opponent's thinking process as easily.

Again, take my advice with a grain of salt, as I myself have yet a lot to learn.

You may do well with Fischer's openings and it makes sense to try them since you study his games, but don't get fooled into the idea that you will win more games because you play Fischer's openings.

When I coached high school chess I used to curse the USCF's trickery of young players by advertising books with b.s., harmful lines like, "Play the world champions openings and win!"  The purpose of any opening is to get you to a playable middle game. The purpose of developing an opening repertoire is to become comfortable and knowledgeable as to what attacking plans are typical with the openings you play.

I have no problem wth God. But I do have a problem with you.