Good opening against E4?
Sort:
OP, How come you do not wish to plY scicilian. That's what I would choose so I am curious.
The sicilian is too complex for that rating group. If white follows e4 with the ruy lopez or the guicco piano the most common openings if black responds with ..e5 followed by ..Nc6 an interesting and solid defence may be the smyslo/barnes Defence.
I usually play the Pirc too, but sometimes I switch things up with the Alekhine.
Michael-G wrote:
You are sub-1100(as you say) and you think you are losing after 1.e4 e5 because of the opening?Basically you need an opening that it will transform you from bad( on 1.e4 e5) player to good.You don't need an opening , you need a miracle.Or simply realise that opening is not your problem(but that is a small miracle too).You should ask about good middle-game books and not good openings.
I need a miracle as much as you need to learn english. I never said I was losing games after e5, I wanted to have other options.
Elona wrote:
OP, How come you do not wish to plY scicilian. That's what I would choose so I am curious.
For some reason I'm having a hard time grasping the fact that I need to conceed the center with the scicilian, which led me to screw up my games later on (unbalanced positions). Not saying I will ever learn about it, but so far I'd rather concentrate on other openings :)
c5 fights for the center (d4) just as well as e5, just not symmetrical, so it leads to imbalanced play. More wins and less draws.
Sometimes you have to sacrifice the fact that you are not Karpov for
the fact that you are not Tal either!
When learning openings, I also wasn't too comfortable with the Sicilian. I didn't like facing it nor playing it when I tested it out. The Sicilian is a really good defense for black but that doesn't mean it will suit everyone at their current skill level. It wasn't until I decided to really get back into chess and start studying it more that I decided to tackle the Sicilian head on and now I like it and use it as my main response for e4. I feel that it presents ideas and tactics that improved my chess skills overall. However, I wasn't ready for it when I was learning openings in scholastic chess several years ago so I understand where you're coming from.
No one here will have a correct opening that will work for you. You'll just have to try several out. You have about 5 defenses mentioned in this thread. Start with one, get some master games with those defenses and play through to around move 10. Then look at the position and evaluate it, see if you like it and can formulate a plan. I'd then play a few games using one of the defenses and then move on to the next opening. By the end, you should have one that you feel comfortable with.
chrisr2212 wrote:
lonecrow wrote:
Elona wrote:
OP, How come you do not wish to plY scicilian. That's what I would choose so I am curious.
For some reason I'm having a hard time grasping the fact that I need to conceed the center with the scicilian, which led me to screw up my games later on (unbalanced positions). Not saying I will ever learn about it, but so far I'd rather concentrate on other openings :)
what ?? you're not making a lot of sense there!
As long as I understand myself eh cutie pie? :)
look E4 is the best by test as Fischer said :)
Always Garry kasparov defense it by siscillian ..
About me I played siscillian sometimes and e5 other times ..
but if you were aggrassive player you will make him suffering and cause problems to him with e5 .. If you early learned chess don't play except siscillian against E4 ^^
e4 h7 !
Estragon wrote
If you EVER drop a piece to a one- or two-move trick you didn't see, you have no business even thinking about studying openings.
This is hyperbole, at best. Grandmasters still fall for an uncommon two-move trick every now and then. If you don't believe me, read the sample of http://www.newinchess.com/Invisible_Chess_Moves-p-960.html The very first example is Petrosian not noticing his queen en prise, and there are plenty of others. The idea that strong players never fall for simple tactics is a myth.
Whatever the criterion for studying openings should be, it certainly can't be that you NEVER EVER drop a piece to a one- or two-move trick you didn't see, as that would exclude probably all the top players, who have all at one point or another had an inexplicable momentary lapse in judgment that they found it difficult to comprehend they could have made after the fact.
dbag301 wrote:
The French was the first real opening I learned. There is a bit of theory but it's really not necessary if you are starting and playing players under 1100. I just knew the general idea of the French and it worked well when I was starting out. You'll eventually get used to positions and strategies that work and know which don't work.
yes yes ..French is realy good ,but I know a lot of traps a gainst every move in it :)
[COMMENT DELETED]
At a low level, I'd say learn the basic stuff (obviously). The Sicilian is complicated, symmetric openings are easier to comprehend in my opinion. Learn a few basic openings well, try to understand the ideas behind them, learn some useful concepts such as piece development and placement and controlling the centre, and then focus mostly on improving tactics. Try the tactics trainer, I find it very useful. Try to do a few puzzles every day, and don't give up. :)
RoffleMyWafflez wrote:
[COMMENT DELETED]
[COMMENT DELETED]
lonecrow wrote:
Hello all! I was looking for a good opening against E4? I don't want to play the siscilian, so basically I play e5 and then I improvise... Which have often led me astray.
I have seen a lot of opening for the D4 move, although much of my oponents open with E4 (I play sub 1100).
Any suggestions? Thanks again :)
You can use the Karo-Cann, Slav, or Center Counter Game... they all do ok, but the don't seem as sharp as King's Pawn game... but they give more immediate protection from vicious attackers if you tend to blunder early under pressure...
French defence (1. .. e6) is a nice game for Black.