I Can’t Seem to Get the Pirc to Work for Me

Yeah

Never said you did that, just saying some people do. 

Wanna annotate a game? I already asked for one...no response there either. I took liberty of looking at one, you had made a few mistakes by move 8 (opponent was out of book early). Typical stuff until you reach a certain point.

Anyways, here's some Pirc and similar/related opening videos you might find helpful/interesting. Last two videos are to pound you over the head about playing fast time controls now won't help you improve.

Hanging Pawns Pirc Defence Playlist 

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLssNbVBYrGcCSjrUJDd0Og_wklfPXSakQ

Philidor Defence -Hanham
https://youtu.be/QH3LGpjg-ao

Robert Ramirez Pirc Defence Playlist

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLQKBpQZcRycrdFv_RC9rovYN1Wh6F_JPR

Robert Ramirez Czech Pirc Defence

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLQKBpQZcRycoWYXWK3rI7c9uBgCrEPtb0

 Black Lion-ish Rep 1
https://youtu.be/qgOPd8q1qIE

Rep 2
https://youtu.be/vWKV8mmr_uc

Rep 3
https://youtu.be/AL7vXnptOLo

Black Lion (Simon Williams)
https://youtu.be/7j12fhWid3g

https://youtu.be/IRSyBFtcqH8

Philidor/Old Indian Rep 1
https://youtu.be/K5dCXfnsON0

Rep 2
https://youtu.be/qw-0IcEkwfE

Candidate Moves
https://youtu.be/5rEqhhYYOrQ

Calculating
https://youtu.be/pEsA1eB8RBI

No problem

Humnn

Hi there,

I can relate heavily here. The Pirc Defense is my favorite opening, has been for over a few years now. I don't mind the constant struggle of having less space, but having to strive for equality by playing super-dynamic and highly accurate moves, most of which don't always adhere to classical principles or seem to be positionally desirable, is quite a challenge. As such, the resulting positions stemming from the Pirc are often leaving Black on the back foot if Black slips up somewhere. And with slip up, I don't mean making a little mistake. I mean making a slight inaccuracy which could concede the attacking initiative to White or allows White to tighten their grip on your already cramped position.

As for the comment on the "theoretical" aspect of the Pirc, I would offer the following words. Yes, the ideas behind the Pirc aren't that theoretical. Within 5 or so moves you've accomplished a simple plan and are ready to enter the middle game, unlike a Sicilian Najdorf, King's Indian Mar del Plata etc. etc. It is the middle game which becomes theoretical, where it is not the depth of the variations but the sheer broad options for White to reply to your setup. White almost always has an easier time developing and attacking, whilst Black always has to play catch-up in a creative yet precise manner. White doesn't feel stressed to pick the 'best' option, since most replies leave White with an easier game, yet Black has to feel stressed about which path to take and how to combat White's strong center and seemingly well-coördinated pieces. 

My advice? Keep playing the Pirc, don't let yourself be discouraged. Start analysing your wins and losses from the middlegame, from around move 5. Grab a pen and paper and a real board, replay the moves from your game and do small annotations, among the lines of "On move 6 in the Austrian, White pushed e5. Why didn't I choose Nfd7? Why is dxe5 good/wrong? Why can't I play Ng5?" or among the lines of "I saw that the c7-c5 push was available, but I know he could reply with a d4-d5 push, now why didn't I go for that to break his center apart?"... And once you've replayed up till a winning or resignable position you can opt to get a computer into play for further analysis. 

If you can keep growing in that particular aspect (i.e. converting any sort of setup against the Pirc White employs into a position for yourself that is playable, be that equal or winning), you'll see that you'll have less lost positions and less of a hard time enjoying the Pirc Defense. 

Cheers mate. Hopefully this bundle of thoughts can help. 

It would be a huge suprise if the Pirc worked for any beginner or post beginner.

At the OP's level, the way you win games is with initiative and piece activity. Even if you have to give up a pawn or two, if you've got those going for you, you're going to beat all the other 1000's out there. In other words, find an opening that lets you fight, not one where you hunker down and get attacked. So I'd ditch the Pirc. TBH, I'd also steer clear of stuff like the French or Caro Kann. I'd say 1..e5 is your best bet, or if you want to be sneaky you can learn some of the 1..d5 gambits (portuguese + icelandic) which will give you some pretty fun attacking games at your level against those players who like to gobble pawns.

well, the Pirc was never meant to be an easy opening and no one can shame on you for that, there are many other promising defenses out there that you can study

indeed. The Pirc has withstood the test of time and is a viable option, to me. I have never played it in my 30+ year of experience,

as full disclosure but yeah, I kind of like your overall take, your chess philosophy. I would recommend studying some of GM Yasser Seirawan's games to get an idea how he plays it as a start. There is a book by Mednis(?) which touches upon it too ("Sister Openings " or something like that) or if anything search for a treatise on the Pirc.

indeed2. Have you ever considered Benko's opening as well? 1. ... g6 can transpose to the Pirc and some themes are relatable (aka the Modern)

my last recommendation would be to rethink your philosophy on defense in the meantime. Don't try to "win" as black. Play to Equalize. To draw with black vs strong opponents is a "win" you know! As you build your skillset, gain experience, practice, study you will eventually level up and know when you can be aggressive. But yeah, for now, keep your head on a swivel, equalize first, THEN fish for something~ from Bobby Fischer

man, people have some really old fashioned opinions around these parts.

Having said that, pirc is not an easy defense to start with. You will reach many positions where you simply cannot be expected to know the differences in subtle order differences, or why one e5 push is deadlier than another or how to eye-ball what kind of attack you can weather or not. The good thing though, is that your opponent is unlikely to play really challenging set-ups either so if you are willing to do your homework i dont see why you coudnt pull it off.

Pirc is only non-theoretical at your level because frankly no one would be prepared for it , pirc becomes pretty theoretical quickly even at the class level and at master level, you will have to know a labyrinth of side lines just to make it viable. It is not quite as theoretical as say, sicilian lines but you usually also take much longer to equalize and remain cramped for some time.

I think by solid what you meant is "sturdy" as in, once you 0-0, your defenses are better than say, a bare f7-g7-h7 kingside, and since beginners often miss attacks on their castled king, the fianchetto really does "Beef" up your defenses. Solid is usually  used for openings/defenses that are relatively "safe" and you dont have any weaknesses. Pirc usually doesnt have the latter, but it is anything but safe. Somes lines are brutal opposite side castling, or big central pawn attacks.

I suggest you take a break from studying the Pirc. In fact, stop playing it all together. If you want something that fits your style, try the Caro-Kann. It's not super theory-heavy according to today's standards (this one opening fills up over a dozen pages in my chess notebook, but it's not nearly as bad as something like the Nimzo-Indian or the Sicilian). Also, don't study opening theory until later on. Instead, I have 2 book recommendations for you: The Woodpecker Method (1 cycle in easy raised my elo by 100 in a day, you'll know what I mean when you get it) and Silman's Complete Endgame Course (so much educational content in the endgame for anyone).

Beginners, as well as World Champion level players have no style.

The former because they know too little, and the latter too much about chess.