Creating an opening repertoire

Sort:
ozzie_c_cobblepot

Remember that in the Fantasy, black doesn't have to go with 3...dxe4 4.fxe4 e5 - maybe instead you can combine your French and Caro-Kann into a King's Indian Attack for both?

Probably the most useful advice I can give you is to carefully consider every trade. Many sub-2000 players will almost make every single capture in the position, where you just won't see that at higher levels.

If you play the Caro-Kann and QGD for black, the natural thing is to play 1.d4 for white, since you're already in the queen pawn world. But then you end up with exactly my repertoire, so maybe Da^H^Hyour coach will not approve?

YeOldeWildman

I recommend sticking with respectable lines and not getting too carried away with aggression for it's own sake.  I typically take bits and pieces out of different repertoire books that feel comfortable for me to play.  As White, I spent a bunch of time messing around with 1.c4 and then 1.d4 before coming back to 1.e4 to stay (probably, at least for the foreseeable future).  It's a better fit if you want more tactical/less positional sorts of play.  Just remember, Black has a say in things too and sometimes you have to play positionally regardless of how aggressive you're feeling at the moment.

The Open Sicilian shouldn't be a problem if you (ironically...) choose to play it positionally with 6.Be2 and kingside castling against almost all Black setups.  Taylor's "Slay the Sicilian" is a good place to look for ideas.  I've had quite a bit of success in my CC games (no OTB for me these days) using this approach.  Karpov played this way a lot in his day.  It's not AGGRESSION the way, say, the Dragon/Yugoslav Attack is for both sides, but it isn't exactly as quiet as 1.Nf3 either.  You often get a comfortable game with more space, better development, and often a middle game or late-middle game attack against the Black king.  What's not to like?

Against the Caro-Kann I play the Short System (a la Kaufmann's "The Chess Advantage in Black and White" - unfortunately out of print and expensive used).  Against the French I play the Tarrasch (a la Tzermiadianos' "How to Beat the French").  Against 1...e5 I play either the Ruy or Italian depending on mood.

As Black, against 1.d4 I play the Modern Benoni a la Petrov's GM Repertoire 12.  Against 1.e4 I play 1...e5 loosely based on this video series made by a USCF Expert with a gift for explaining things, though I play the Open against the Ruy instead of the recommended Berlin, and the Two Knights/Chigoren instead of the recommended Two Knights/Ulvestad (though I still play the Ulvestad against weaker opponents because it's so much fun if not exactly sound...):

http://www.chessvideos.tv/wiki/index.php/Katar

Against more obscure openings, I generally wing it.

Good luck!

Talfan1

since being here ive started to look at fresh openings for me and ones that i hope are unfamiliar to my opponent

I accept in online chess little is new to those who can access database but i do like askijng questions of myself as well here are two ive used the first got me a draw v a 1950 i was about 1550 I was black

1 E4 ...C5

2 Knc3 ... F5

it was actually a mistake by me it was supposed to be a brussels gambit

1 e4 c5   2 knf3 f5 i call it my hybrid lol

the second is more positional i use it sometimes as white

1 D3  a reverse sicilian

pentagram
LacksCreativity wrote:

I'm hitting a bit of a wall at around 1700 uscf, so I want to create a more aggressive repertoire. I basically decided this after a 1500 got an extremely easy draw. I did fight, but there wasn't a lot of play. I've been playing 1.Nf3 and making it up from there for white and the caro kann and QGD for black. They're very solid openings but I feel like I'm an aggressive player, so I think I'm playing the wrong openings. I want to switch to sicillian and the king's indian. As well as an e4 repertoire based on smith morra gambit, the fantasy variation of the caro kann, the King's Indian attack against the french and the Scotch. If anyone has a line against the Pirc I'd be very interested. I just got Fundamental chess openings but have yet to look through it too much. Thoughts? Any places or books you would recommend for researching these openings? Should I even switch? Should I not try these openings but other openings?

switching to 1.e4 may or may not make things more aggressive. It all depends on whether you open the sicilian to aggresive play and this will require a lot of work both in writting down a repertoire and maintaining it. I know of 1 IM who switched to flank openings from 1.e4 because he had no time to maintain an open sicilian repertoire and one strong FM who plays the closed (opening it required too much time but he's not happy with the closed neither). Too many subtleties in the open and very theoretical too.

Instead of completely switching to 1.e4 & playing stuff like the morra why not switch from 1.Nf3 to 1.d4 and pick sharp lines there? you can do a more gradual transition to a new repertoire this way. Add 1-2 sharp lines and see if it works for you. If it does then you can add more sharp lines. 

For more dynamic against 1.d4 why not try the Benko? it's very thematic and Black gets a nice play from early on.

re a reasonable aggresive vs 1.e4, I don't know to be honest, many years ago when I used to have a lot more free time, a lot more energy and a much better memory I used to play the Najdorf, it requires a lot of work though (too much for me nowadays anyhow).

Why not pick some more aggresive lines in the caro e.g. 3. ..c5 vs the advance? and the Bronstein variation against the classical? Sure you won't get a fully aggresive repertoire but in the sicilian too you may end up playing against some slow closed system or a Be2 open system with a queenside clamp, where Black does not get exactly the type of play that made him chose the sicilian as his weapon of choice.

 

Up to you, aggresive opening choices may well bring results but they do require a lot of study.

kingsrook11

If you want something aggressive against the French you would be better off with the Winawer variation rather than the KIA. Then if they choose to play 3Nf6 then look to play the Alekhine-Chatard attack. If they then play the McCutcheon variation in response to 4Bg5 then that should suit you too.

shell_knight
ozzie_c_cobblepot wrote:

Probably the most useful advice I can give you is to carefully consider every trade. Many sub-2000 players will almost make every single capture in the position, where you just won't see that at higher levels.

Yeah, honestly if the OP wants to win lots of games, he could also study the endgame a lot and keep the solid openings and just go into winning endgames all the time.

If you're not enjoying the middlegame positions, then sure, switch your openings, but if you couldn't find any play against the 1500 that may be more indicative of poor endgame understanding (or maybe the 1500 was playing above his level, I don't know).

shell_knight

I tried both the KID and Benoni for a while and I ran back to the QGD Laughing

Maybe go for the Nimzo if you don't like QGD.

Both the KID and Benoni give you... illogical positions to deal with.  If you want to be a tactical houdini (the escape artist, not the engine) then I suppose you should go for it.  But I feel like white's moves are much easier to find so personally I didn't enjoy it.

shell_knight

Wow, that book is huge.  You mean you read most / all of it or just that part on your rating?

shell_knight

Of course... I feel like my style is a slow grinder, and that's what I enjoy.  I don't mind tactics and wild stuff, but I'm not as sure of myself.  Maybe you're the opposite and you'd really like those openings.  I think the most important criteria is liking what you see once you enter the middlegame... even if objectively it's a bit worse for you, you'll tend to outplay your opponent if they're U2000 IMO.

shell_knight
LacksCreativity wrote:

I read up to the expert section on endgames. (Which is still a lot) and then the endgames for pure pleasure section. 

That's really impressive, I want to tackle it someday.  I've dipped in and out of it to pick up different things, but never really tried to get through it like that.

pentagram
LacksCreativity wrote:

I think I've been purposefully avoiding complicated lines though just to try and win. If I play with more active and aggressive openings I think I'll gain more or easier wins in any case then my current ones

I once had a 17 move win vs a FM in the Bg5 Najdorf when I was playing OTB, it was published in a newspaper as well - good times!

 It was all due to home preparation, I chose a sharp offbeat line that I had found in an old Russian book on the Najdorf (lepeshkin) which I had analysed with my coach (who also used a stone-age version of Fritz) then and it worked, 17 moves and I could go have a snack. Near the end I had used 5 mins and he already was in time pressure, all due to home prep, I was almost on auto pilot.

 Playing sharp lines can definitely give you some easy wins. On the other hand, I have to say I didn't get much satisfaction from the win as it felt like I didn't win the game but rather my opponent just didn't manage to match long lines of analysis while the clock was ticking (at the end of the day I didn't even create the bulk of the analysis, so what did I do to win, just memorise?). I left thinking along the lines "that was cool but but what if we were to play again? am I really the better player?"

 I also doubt that this sort of strategy works today with the internet, databases and all that. One could do what I did because 

 1) it was difficult to access the relatively odd book with the analysis. Also not everyone had a computer and the stoneage version of fritz to check the analysis (which needless to say had errors but not too many).

 2) White players almost certainly had access only to the lines recommended in Nunn's book on beating the sicilian so it was pretty easy to book against them and find flaws in their repertoire. If they had SCID+twic to see more of Black's options, theory articles here and there, chess.com+ICC to play against a greater pool of opponents, they would be much better versed.

Today much so more information is available to everyone with the click of a few buttons and repertoire books are of much higher quality, I doubt I'd get a miniature following a similar strategy if I were playing OTB now.

But sharp lines can be fun, go ahead, pick one or two, see how it goes.

Chicken_Monster
pentagram wrote:
LacksCreativity wrote:

I think I've been purposefully avoiding complicated lines though just to try and win. If I play with more active and aggressive openings I think I'll gain more or easier wins in any case then my current ones

I once had a 17 move win vs a FM in the Bg5 Najdorf when I was playing OTB, it was published in a newspaper as well - good times!

 It was all due to home preparation, I chose a sharp offbeat line that I had found in an old Russian book on the Najdorf (lepeshkin) which I had analysed with my coach (who also used a stone-age version of Fritz) then and it worked, 17 moves and I could go have a snack. Near the end I had used 5 mins and he already was in time pressure, all due to home prep, I was almost on auto pilot.

 Playing sharp lines can definitely give you some easy wins. On the other hand, I have to say I didn't get much satisfaction from the win as it felt like I didn't win the game but rather my opponent just didn't manage to match long lines of analysis while the clock was ticking (at the end of the day I didn't even create the bulk of the analysis, so what did I do to win, just memorise?). I left thinking along the lines "that was cool but but what if we were to play again? am I really the better player?"

 I also doubt that this sort of strategy works today with the internet, databases and all that. One could do what I did because 

 1) it was difficult to access the relatively odd book with the analysis. Also not everyone had a computer and the stoneage version of fritz to check the analysis (which needless to say had errors but not too many).

 2) White players almost certainly had access only to the lines recommended in Nunn's book on beating the sicilian so it was pretty easy to book against them and find flaws in their repertoire. If they had SCID+twic to see more of Black's options, theory articles here and there, chess.com+ICC to play against a greater pool of opponents, they would be much better versed.

Today much so more information is available to everyone with the click of a few buttons and repertoire books are of much higher quality, I doubt I'd get a miniature following a similar strategy if I were playing OTB now.

But sharp lines can be fun, go ahead, pick one or two, see how it goes.

Sweet. Can you post the game?

pentagram
Chicken_Monster wrote:
Sweet. Can you post the game?

I can't I'm afraid as this is a game I played 20 years ago and the scoresheets are at a different house in a diferent country.

 I remember which line it was though, it was in the gxf6 Bg5 Najdorf. I doubt that this sort of thing is playable today for the reasons I quoted before but this was the sort of thing that could give you a point in a critical game in a tournament/championship and you never had to play it again once it lost it's surprise value. 

 We did something similar with other openings as well. The logic was not to pick the "best" line but a line where there would be chaos on the board and the opponent would be in unfamiliar territory. On the other hand you'd have everything worked out from the preparation.

 The positions that appear were likely not giving any advantage against correct play, they often were anti-positional and tbh I doubt these are lines one can play in a consistent basis. But ... it can be very hard for the opponent to find correct play while the clock is ticking and if he does, he is likely to spend some time.

The downside to this style of play is that all this is a bit of a gamble, you're not playing the better moves (not horrible ones either) just creating enough complications to put practical problems to your opponent. But all this costs time, time which can be spent on furthering our understanding of the game: improving the endgame, technical positions, positional play etc etc.

TheOldReb
pentagram
Reb wrote:
 

these pigs in the pic clearly are unprepared pigs. The prepared ones stayed dirty and were not slaughtered Cool

FrogCDE

The 150 attack is a good aggressive line against the Pirc and Modern.

minor7b5

MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!MODS ARE EVIL!!! KILL THEM ALL!!!