How to handle openning transpositions?

 I'm going to post the first few moves of a game but don't really won't to focus on the specifics of it.  Recently I decided to give the French a shot...1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5.  Part of the reason for that is after watching some videos and doing a little reading I realized that it was a counter-punchers opening and looked to open the position and wasn't a closed slog like the KID.

 First chance with the French. Oh boy, oh boy. 1. e4 e6 2. Nc3.... Uhm.  Not in the French anymore.  At least not the standard.  My follow up was ...Nc6 and I was in totally unexplored territory [for me]. 

 The move Nc3 is a perfectly fine move by White though it probably isn't optimal. In other words, remarkably playable for white side-stepping reams of French theory.

 My question is whether one should have a backup "system" when someone plays with transpositions. I emphasize the word "system" as I'm thinking about the Modern, Dragadorf, KID, hedgehog, Hippopotamus or the like. The downside of that is one has to learn at least the principles of a new system.

Thoughts?

Never hurts to know as much as possible and as many systems as possible.

MervynS is right on.  Also check out the book "Transpo Tricks in Chess" by Andrew Soltis.

@RanxOrOx

I see you are still looking for a handle on improving your chess.  To get an answer to your transposition question read, "Pawn Power In Chess", by Hans Kmoch.  Trust me, begin reading the book beginnning with 107 and read thru to pg 373.  DO NOT READ ANYTHING BEFORE PG. 107 UNTIL AFTER YOU HAVE READ FROM PG. 107 TO THE END OF THE BOOK.

@Yarsolavl

Thanks.  I'll definitely have to pick it up. It's a classic and one I've meant to read.  One definite jump start for me was going through John Nunn's book on chess tactics.  Solving a lot of puzzles of varying complexity was good at sharpening the eye.

Many years ago I read Andy Soltis' book Pawn Structure Chess and it was the first time that I understood the implications of many of the oppenings and the thoughts behind them and, therefore, the ways to think about them.  It sounds like Kmoch falls in the same category.

The past 20 years were a hiatus from chess for me as I focused on my software engineering career.  When I came back to it I decided to switch from 1. e4 to 1. d4 and to try something other than the Sicilian which I played those many moons ago.  It's rather hard to transpose out of a Sicilan though one does have some oddball sidelines.

@MervynS

While it is good to improve one's chess knoweldge in general perhaps I should ask the question a little differently.  Do you have a system you fall back on when unexpected transpositions occur?  As a software architect there are technology stacks that I know deeply and other that I have passing familiarity with.  It simply is impossible to know everything. 

I was reading Cyrus Lakdawala's book on the Modern and while it is good and sane it is one more thing to learn in addition to whatever else I might choose as my primary defenses.  Sure one can play it as a primary defensive system but I don't care for it enough to do so.

But when i think about an opening like 1. e4 e6 2. Nc3...then instead of trying to figure out what system one just accidentally walked into a move like 2.g6 followed by 3. a6 or the like simply coils up and stays out of the way. Defenses like this and the KID always struck me as two people playing chess by themselves.  There's something to be said though for safely developing and castling with little risk except a small cramp.

We get hit by transpoistions all the time and we hit others with them.  It's part of the chess aikido.

@Candyass4ever

Thanks.  I'll look at the book.  I recal very much liking Pawn Structure Chess and his book on Defense as well.  So perhaps this will fit in the shelf with them.

I've picked up a few books by Aagaard but since they are hard copies it is tough for me to pack the extra weight, slim as they are, for all the flying I do.

I think I posted the following on another of your threads.  In "Pawn Power In Chess", on pg. 107 Hans Kmoch writes almost every opening results in one of 6 characteristic pawn structures/formations.  He also details how to play those 6 from the White and Black side. 

This fact alone will go a long way to solving your transpositional problems.

I post this again, because what is important bears repeatng!

Not really, for example I usually play 1...d5 after 1. d4 and pretty well I have to know from the black side, both the Exchange Varation and the non-Exchange variations of the Queen's Gambit Declined. If white decides to fianchetto his king's bishop in the Queen's Gambit Declined, it turns out I also have to know parts of the Catalan. If white decides to box in his dark squared bishop with e3, then I feel knowing something about the Slav would be in order. Since playing c5 is often a necessity for black, knowing something about the Tarrasch is going to help. 

etc.

@MervynS

I never really had a special openning back in the olden days when used the Sicilian and KID but the KID itself is something of a system where you go off and do 7  moves and then start playing against your opponent.

Since I'm now switchng from 1. e4 to 1. d4 I have to be familiar with pretty much anything I can face though not entirely conversant.  But I find that the defenses one faces with 1. d4 2. c4  seem to be easier to reason about and a bit easier to reason through what the best move is. If not best at least good.  If not good at least fair.  In other words I find less of an opportunity to have to deal with real hair raising wild complications than i do with 1. e4.  That's a generalization of course.

In my current repertoire I'm sticking primarily to 3. Nc3 when feasible to avoid whiplash from transpositions.  That means I am willing to play against the Nimzo.  So I get it for the most part.

But you're always going to catch one on the chin when you happn to be flatfooted. A good boxer then covers up an pulls back into the ropes to get their act together.  That's sort of how I felt when I was hit by that move order.  Not that it was wild or crazy just not what I'd been reading about nor what was on the two long DVDs abot the opening.

I went to order it and found that it was in descriptive notation.  That happened to me recently with another book.  I recall getting mad when publishers switched from descriptive to algebraic now I have a hard time reading descriptive.  Time for a good author and publisher to reissue this book in algebraic.

With how I play 1. d4, I have found that the Benoni structures are mandatory to understand as black can transpose into it many ways that white can not really prevent. I think there is also a way to get to some of the Maroczy Bind variations in the Siclian Kan when black plays c5 and not d5 against 1.d4.

Best way to catch something on the chin is via lightning, bullet or blitz chess, you realize you run into a problem but you don't waste too much time getting stomped on while giving yourself a chance to look at your loss after. One example where I lost in what, 7 moves was me playing white against the Englund Gambit in bullet chess.

Let me guess, something along the lines of :

1. d4 e5 2. dxe5 Nc6 3. Nf3 Qe7 4. Bf4 Qb4+ 5. Bd2 Qxb2 6. Bc3 Bb4 7. Qd2 Bxc3 8. Qxc3 Qc1# 

I think I resigned on move 7

Ouch.  That's rough. Obviously easier for folks to play wild gambits in blitz than in standard time or on the days long games.  I used to play a lot of blitz back in the day but I found it started to creep into the way I played longer games - bang out the move fast without real contemplation.

I've faced a couple of folks playing gambits like that in games that are 3 days per move and they fall flat.

It was bullet, so it wasn't too big of a deal.