Four Knights Defense

Just wanted to get some opinions on the Four Knights. I play this defense frequently, with either the Scotch or Spanish variation. I have found that it leads to very positional play, but allows many tactics to seep through.

Four Knights: Scotch

Four Knights: Spanish

Does anyone else play this opening? If so, feel free to post games, variations, etc.

Glek system is also cool.

Objectively it's probably equalish, but can be very complex.

http://www.chess.com/echess/game?id=92386610

Thank you. I will take a look at the line you mentioned.

I like the Four Knights as White or Black. I pretty much had to learn it since I play the Petroff as Black so when White plays 3. Nc3 in the Petroff, that pretty much guarantees a Four Knights Game. I'm still relearning the in's and out's of this opening, though, so I don't have much to add as commentary. I'm not sure if a kingside fianchetto is good in a symmetrical KP opening like this. I remember some guy wrote a letter to Chess Life magazine years ago to ask the editors' opinions about his own opening 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. g3, and they told him they didn't think much of it since his KB will be blocked by the "e" pawns for a long time. That's almost what the Glek is doing, so by that advice the Glek would not be a good idea. If fianchettos (kingside or queenside) were so good in symmetrical KP openings, you'd expect to see them in main lines of the Ruy Lopez, Petrov, Philidor, and other such openings, but you don't.

Thanks. I should've added that I have a thing for symmetrical positions, so when White plays 3. Nc3, well, I just can't *resist* 3...Nc6!

A Russian GM, who at the peak of his career was number 12 in the world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Igor_Glek

The four knights is okay, but not as interesting as the Ruy Lopez for instance. You can find some interesting information about the four knights in the forum "Alternatives to the Ruy Lopez" by lolurspammed, by I think that is mostly concentrated on the scotch and Fried Liver

Many of my friends perform fake yawns when I discuss my usage of the Four Knights. Depending on their skill level, I usually beat them afterward :D

pfren I was actually curious about that reversed Halloween, not because I play it, but because of the mechanics of a tempo down piece sac, it is of interest to me simply because I wish to better my tactical vision.

ok thanks. that makes a bit of sense.

I just decided to try this opeing out today. It seems reliable, safe, and will allow me to get into the midgame in ok shape. 

I looked at several 4th move options, and the most popular seems to be Bb5, the Spanish Variation. Its also close to the Ruy Lopez. Whenever I play either this or the Ruy Lopez, Black always plays 4)...a6, kicking the bishop. I have the Modern Chess Openings book (from the library ive renewed it 4 times) and they say nothing of this move, so obviously its a week move. However, everyone <1000 I play against plays it. How to I exploid this week move?

My options are:

Move: 4...a6, 5) Ba4  a5 6) Bb3

or just take the knight Bxc6.

Thanks. This always happens when I play this or the Ruy Lopez.

 

Thanks pfren. I was moving the bishop away which was not working. 

JOVINDSOUZA,

Speaking of Black's kingside weaknesses, here is a decisive game I won last night against the computer with a similar position in the Four Knights Game. In this game I merely let Black play ...dxe4 with hopes of pinning a piece against his king, Black fell for it, and on top of him weakening his king side earlier with ...h6 and ...g5, I was able to exploit his exposed kingside by noticing and playing the moves Qd4 and Qf6, which threatened a rapid mate.

@Sqod, 29. Rxd8+

Yes, thanks, I fixed that notation error (Rxd8+ should have been Rxe8+) by the time you posted. I had various problems posting that PGN text this morning, partly because I had inadvertently inserted a line of text between the tag section and the move section, and the upload software didn't know what kind of file it was viewing until I deleted that line. Then I discovered that transcription error you mentioned.

BoardOfWar,

I'm not so sure beginners should shy away from studying openings. Openings, tactics, and strategy all fit together, at least eventually, so it makes sense to study them together right from the start, though admittedly in smaller doses than an experienced player would do. For example, you wouldn't study pronunciation, grammar, and vocabulary in separate months when studying a given foreign language because you need all three right from the start. They all fit together as a cohesive whole.

Well put, Squod.

I think that a 1400 player should surely know the above, great compiled list btw, but I would be concerned if an 800 player did not know those. I am no opening specialist by any means, but I know the basic lines for the Ruy, Gioco Piano, QG, KG, Four Knights, Sicilian (Najdorf, Alapin, Dragon, Smith-Morra), Nimzo-Indian, etc. I tend to prefer either extreme attacks (such as from Tal, Alekhine, or Kaspy) or tense positional play (such as from Karpov, Steinitz, Nimzovich, etc). I'm no GM, I don't claim to be, but I think that different learning methods work for different people.

I just want to thank Robert for giving me a shoutout.

The problem is that this theory, while theoretically correct, is not practical in chess. 

This theory assumes that there is some mastery in the areas you mentioned but in chess that isn't the case at all. Most games at club level are won by tactics and blunders. It occurs so often that strategy becomes irrelevant since pieces don't stay on the board long enough for it to work. 

And even strategy does work out the positions won't win themselves. Sooner or later someone has to attack and you get back to the tactics problem again. That's why tactics tend to be what people recommend. When you can learn to attack and defend decently then strategy and openings start to get a little more important.