How come no one ever asks for an opening where they are on the defense early on?
I am looking for an opening that suits my style... I like to play passively and be attacked on the kingside, even if I need to have material compensation for that. Who can help me ?
This post was a joke guys, no need to answer it.
If I should select a wild gambit repertoire, where positions are open, white has the intiative, and it doesn't have to be theoretical correct (at 1350, it is not a theoretical novelty on move 15 which decides who wins), I would select 1: e4!
1: e4 e5 2. f4. The Kings Gambit is classical, and mutual chances. Your opponent will probably know it, but learning a few lines and typical sacrifices will make it a dangerous opening.
1. e4 c5 2. d4. Only gambit I ever played against the sicilian. On a ChessCube rating on 2100, I have a score on around 70% after 1: e4 c5 2: d4 cxd4 3: c3 dxc3 4: Nxc3 in 35 games (My score is lower against 3: ... Nf6 and d3), so it's playable in blitz, and with a 2½/3 score in tournament events (ELO around 1800), it's playable in OTB chess.
1: e4 e6 2: d4 d5 3: exd5! exd5 4: c4. Not a gambit, but the isolated pawn gives an initiative.
1: e4 c6 2: d4 d5 3: Nc3 dxe4
I normally play 6. N1e2 against Bf5, 5: Ng5 against Nd7 and main line against Nf6. But my coach recommends:
4: f3!? exf3 5: Nxf3 with unclear play.
The scenario which says that a "tactical" player has to play gambit lines is fundamentally flawed.
Factly, the opening is highly irrelevant to the type of play one wants to apply.
I can mention say GM Vlado Covacevic- a superb tactician, most of his games ended up in a horrible mess with pieces hanging everywhere. Guess what the guy was playing as white? You won't...
The London System!
Theoreticians may shrug in despair, but this is a fact...
I recommend that you change your coach.
The French! Hope your opponent does a Greek Gift Sacrifice, mess up, and end up wasting a bishop for nothing. :D
the french isn't passive at all.... it's an opening where black has to fight from the start. you clearly don't know what you're talking about.
My coach is very nice. His openings are not very theoretical (ELO around 1900-2000), Kings Bishops Gambit, Black Knights Tango (he really loves that one) and Morra Gambit. He don't think positional chess is as fun as wild sacrfices, and accepts that a lower rating, but a sharper repertoire is the way to make chess fun for him.
He is not a private coach, but one in my chess club, so pretty difficult to change him :D.
When you improve, you should play sharp openings, such as gambits or openings where material is often sacrificed. Then you get a feeling of how much the initiative is worth in pawns, which is very important in internatinal chess.
I believe in this theory. However, knowing when to change from gambit play to main lines is very important.
When you improve, you should play sharp openings, such as gambits or openings where material is often sacrificed. Then you get a feeling of how much the initiative is worth in pawns
If that's the reasoning behind his recommendation, ok then. I misread that he recommends that line no matter what level you have, and if it was that he would not be a serious guy, but I support him here.