I pick an opening and use it for 6-12 months. Pretty soon you will have tried them all.
How to know which opening is the best for you ?
Sort:
which ones do you ENJOY playing most? forget about style. the games you enjoy the most are your style.
if you want a more objective answer, look at you win percentages for every line you play and follow the wins
one question to ask is,
do you like to attack or defend? regardless of which color you are playing.
example: against 1.e4 if you like to attack then maybe Sicilian but if you like to defend then maybe the Caro kann.
there are probably other examples but it gets the idea of the philosophy across.
Nov 6, 2023
0
#5
There is a chess personality quiz that you can take that will help you with that. If you want to choose a different opening that's fine but it is incredibly important that you stick with it and study it hard. Don't play other openings until you are expert level.
ThaNecromancer wrote:
There is a chess personality quiz that you can take that will help you with that. If you want to choose a different opening that's fine but it is incredibly important that you stick with it and study it hard. Don't play other openings until you are expert level.
while I understand what you are saying, studying other openings, regardless of whether you actually play them or not, will introduce you to positional and tactical ideas that you can introduce into your own games.
e.g. e4 is better for tactical players and d4 for strategical ones. But there are some exceptions.
Nov 6, 2023
0
#8
The best way is to do what I did. Study Endgames, Tactics, and Strategy for 6 months. Play a bunch of games during that time, trying out different pawn formations. Which makes the most sense to you? While the moves may not be the same, find out which opening has that pawn formation. You need to figure that out for e4 and for d4.
Believe it or not, that is how I became a French Defense player. I was playing thr French in late 1995 and early 1996 not even knowing what the French Defense is or having even heard of it. Now? 27 years under my belt of French Defense experience. You are best off establishing your opening like a baby establishes being left or right handed. You have to do massive studying after that, and I've owned and read roughly a dozen-and-a-half French books. So that 6-month exercise is just the beginning.
Nov 6, 2023
0
#9
petitchefhivert wrote:
It's been 2 years since I started to play chess. I always thinked that one day I would find an opening and know every details of it by heart. I tried several opening but I still don't know which one is the best for me and how can I decided that.
I made this video months ago. Perhaps it will help you decide on an opening. The personality quiz and the flowchart may help 
Thank you for the answer
Nov 7, 2023
0
#12
If you are looking for something new you could always look up some old games and maybe draw some inspiration from those.
chessterd5 wrote:
one question to ask is,
do you like to attack or defend? regardless of which color you are playing.
example: against 1.e4 if you like to attack then maybe Sicilian but if you like to defend then maybe the Caro kann.
there are probably other examples but it gets the idea of the philosophy across.
as white you are supposed to attack or gain an advantage, not sit back with your arms in front of your face and defend.
AngryPuffer wrote:
chessterd5 wrote:
one question to ask is,
do you like to attack or defend? regardless of which color you are playing.
example: against 1.e4 if you like to attack then maybe Sicilian but if you like to defend then maybe the Caro kann.
there are probably other examples but it gets the idea of the philosophy across.
as white you are supposed to attack or gain an advantage, not sit back with your arms in front of your face and defend.
yes and no. not always. a reverse phillidor set up by white comes to mind. there are some white openings that rely more on waiting for black to make a mistake as opposed to initiating an all out attack.
chessterd5 wrote:
AngryPuffer wrote:
chessterd5 wrote:
one question to ask is,
do you like to attack or defend? regardless of which color you are playing.
example: against 1.e4 if you like to attack then maybe Sicilian but if you like to defend then maybe the Caro kann.
there are probably other examples but it gets the idea of the philosophy across.
as white you are supposed to attack or gain an advantage, not sit back with your arms in front of your face and defend.
yes and no. not always. a reverse phillidor set up by white comes to mind. there are some white openings that rely more on waiting for black to make a mistake as opposed to initiating an all out attack.
so it seems to me as if you as white just play hope chess and sit there for the whole game hoping that black makes a mistake. what if he doesnt? what if both of you just trade down everything in 20 moves and enter an equal endgame where there are no chances
compare that to an opening where white seizes the initative he starts with and challenges black. now not only if black makes a mistake he loses, but if he plays too passively or too aggressively then he will also lose
true. I was not advocating any particular style. I was merely stating that different people have different temperaments. and there are options available to every kind of player.
Tal liked to blow the board up from move one.
Karpov just wanted to be equal and then squeeze.
Petrosian did not care if there were any tactics on either side just as long as his opponent didn't have counter play.
chessterd5 wrote:
true. I was not advocating any particular style. I was merely stating that different people have different temperaments. and there are options available to every kind of player.
Tal liked to blow the board up from move one.
Karpov just wanted to be equal and then squeeze.
Petrosian did not care if there were any tactics on either side just as long as his opponent didn't have counter play.
EXACTLY!
I think i'm kind of a Tal style player
gik-tally wrote:
chessterd5 wrote:
true. I was not advocating any particular style. I was merely stating that different people have different temperaments. and there are options available to every kind of player.
Tal liked to blow the board up from move one.
Karpov just wanted to be equal and then squeeze.
Petrosian did not care if there were any tactics on either side just as long as his opponent didn't have counter play.
EXACTLY!
I think i'm kind of a Tal style player
then I would highly recommend that you read Mikhail Tals 100 best games.
chessterd5 wrote:
gik-tally wrote:
chessterd5 wrote:
true. I was not advocating any particular style. I was merely stating that different people have different temperaments. and there are options available to every kind of player.
Tal liked to blow the board up from move one.
Karpov just wanted to be equal and then squeeze.
Petrosian did not care if there were any tactics on either side just as long as his opponent didn't have counter play.
EXACTLY!
I think i'm kind of a Tal style player
then I would highly recommend that you read Mikhail Tals 100 best games.
i also recommend this, it would show him how even the sharpest of players wont play the ¨monkey poop toilet¨ variation of whatever opening gambit hes trying out that day
It's been 2 years since I started to play chess. I always thinked that one day I would find an opening and know every details of it by heart. I tried several opening but I still don't know which one is the best for me and how can I decided that.