Find an opening that suits my playing style well.

@Irotinger

I'm not the one throwing insults. I know it doesn't develop pieces quickly and can produce problems in defense, meaning it doesn't follow opening principles if you look at it in such black and white terms. I have explained my reasoning already and don't wish to do so again.

It's ironic how you assume I'm going to insult you when you call me an idiot because you haven't read what I have posted.

I'm a teenager, but that doesn't make you any better than me. I show respect to adults, but not when they treat me like a 6 year old kid claiming to be world number 1. As I said, I want help not aggressive criticism. Leave if you can only provide the latter

Likhit1 wrote:

Why exactly are you respondin like that?If you wanna say something to me,you shouda just replied to my post.not the whole thing.Anyways,I dont understand how you can feel insulted when i never even said anything about you!I was just telling you the flaws of the Balogh.You interpreted it as arrogance,oh well.Anyways,it is up to you to decide whether you wanna continue playing it or not.Im just offering my advise,that's it.

It's difficult to figure out how to use the forums on my phone. It's playing up.

I might have gotten you confused with whoever was insulting me and if I have I apologize. I just don't see how people think its justified to call someone an idiot because they are younger and less experienced than them and are asking for help. To me that actually seems pretty smart...

"In a few years" did not refer to your age, but to the fact you will (hopefully) get a better chess player with time, whether you are 16 or 60 now.

The only thing I understood in your reasoning is "I like it because I get good positions" which is not very informative. If you can see a clear interest in playing that opening, you could post it for the others to comment on it. Or an example game. Unless you are asuming we can read your mind ? Or you are afraid pfren will just demolish White's play that led you to emerge ahead ?

My first thought is to just play exf5 with Nf3 and I've won control over e5 for the foreseeable future.  If you want to place a pawn in the center not only does d5 constitute a waste of time (taking 2 moves to get there) but you'll also have the backward e pawn.  Also how will you develop your dark square bishop?  g6 is ugly (another pawn move, and loosening even more knigside squares)  So then e6?  But in 3 moves you've already accepted a cramped position with passive development?  And the bishop on f5 looks nice, but will black really trade it in the case of Bd3?  If not he loses a tempo, and if he does the light squares (e6 in particular) would be pretty loose.

But when I look in my (admittedly old) database I don't see this being played... so I wonder if my idea is not so good.  I tried it against my computer and am happy with my positions, but of course the computer isn't so good in openings so I'm not sure (I didn't give it forever to think and I didn't try many different lines).

I wonder if my approach is bad?  I actually think it's a simple and strong solution.

Nc3 is the most played move.Seems like white doesent wanna capture away frm the centre and just wants to develop.

But the e pawn is backward, as white the open e file helps me.

Obviously development is good... and more popular.  I don't really understand why this hasn't been tried though.  Maybe later in my development I'll understand it better.  I was wondering if it's because you're giving black "development" ... but like I said after Bd3 at some point will black really allow a trade or spend a tempo moving it again?

Personally,I like both exf5 and Nc3.In these kinda openings,doesent really matter much,Im sure both are equally good for white.Not many people expect this opening to be played,so they must have probably played the natural looking Nc3.I dunno

Actually Wafflemaster,ur right.I just checked the number of games Nc3 has been played but not the results,but after seeing the results,exf5 seems much better.Black has a ridiculous win rate after exf5

In a big database if exf5 with Nf3 has never been tried though then I'm probably not evaluating it correctly.

I'm willing to bet it's just because white's giving black a developing move... and that the bishop on f5 / the light squares aren't as bad as I think they are for some reason.

Anyway, for the pawn structure alone this looks not fun for black.  Whatever white tries he should be comfortable.  Are there any traps associated with the opening that make it attractive to the OP I wonder?

There don't seem to be Any bothersome traps or such,Guess we'll have to ask the OP himself.

Or really?  In my database white scores really well (76%) after 3.exf5.  But even better after 3.Nc3 (83%).

After the capture they don't seem to like 4.Nf3 as a followup though, they almost all play 4.Bd3.

I checked in the Chess.com databse,but probably urs is better.I dunno,but Id be more than happy if somebody played this against me in a tournament game.

I haven't read anything but the first post, but I would really reccomend the Veresov or the Blackmar Diemer Gambit. They're really aggressive, and just as crazy as the Fried Liver. The only difference is that if you back out, you're only down a pawn. They're also EXTREMELY open, which the defender is not expecting, since you start 1.d4.

I don't think discussing the benefits of the Balogh will help the OP in the slightest.

Instead, learn how to attack. The great classic, The Art of Attack in Chess by Vladimir Vukovich, is available in many public libraries and there are many other good chess books available. 

The first thing to learn is how to attack the uncastled king.

Take a look at the above game. Ask yourself what would have happened if Black had played 10...d5 instead of 10...b5. There are other questions in the text of that game for you to study.

Number two is not 100% accurate though I admit it seems that way. I like to have my bishops active on the longer diagonals, often not fianchettoed. I do like to co-ordinate them but I also like to have them attacking different places if it is better for my position. I do, however, like very mush to have two bishops and as a result, an open board.

Ok I'll look at the blackmar-deimer gambit, the veresov and the reti.

Thank you to you kind people actually offering me the help I asked for.

As for playing as black against 1. d4, I play the old benoni.