Their decision to play Owen's Defence is based on the expectation that they will score well because many people don't know the basic first moves white should make, so they play things like d3. And then, on the other hand, they play too aggressively and get caught that way. I just looked at a computer line where in the basic position, black plays 4. ...Nf6 and white responds with 5. h4. I couldn't believe it and looked at it and found h4 is justified.
To play against it, you have to balance positional play with aggression. Not many players under about 1900 can do that well. In the old BCF (British Chess Federation) system, when I was a 150 player, which was 1800 FIDE or, in the North of England, actually 1880, because we were undergraded, you tended to start to be scared of 165 and over. They had moved to another level. When I arrived at that level with a rating of 172, I knew why. 172 is 1975 FIDE and you're starting to become a strong player at that rating. And again, I live and play in the North of England and so my true, FIDE equivalent was 2050. Eventually they gave us all 10 grading points more and evened it up that way because, at the intermediate level, my county, Lancashire, won the English county championships time after time because we were stronger than Yorkshire and grade for grade, we were stronger than all the other counties across the board.
So basically, Owen's shouldn't be viable against a 1950 FIDE and above. That might equate to maybe 2150 or 2250 on Chess.com.
i suppose grandmasters Miles, Bauer Blatny, Kengis didnt get your memo.
I dont know what your non sequitur about british chess has to do with the Owen's but considering its most famous advocate was Britains' first GM , the irony is palpable.
There is even a funny story involving Seirawan (may have been one of the olympiads) from the 1980's when Miles was crushing with the owen's left and right, and Seirawan was unwilling to be next in line to Tony's prep, so he played 1.g3. Seirawan says Miles leaned in and said " i do so love these moral victories" XD.
Miles was tactically strong and people like that play openings like that on a percentage basis. It can work well, especially if the one on the white side has a tournament score that forces him to go win or bust. I've been in that position myself, last round in a tounament. You can play solidly and keep the draw in hand but, against a good opponent, and you've figured out that just half a point will at best give you a five way tie or something, for first place, then you play win or bust to get that extra half point. Because you think that such an opponent will manage to hold you if you play to contain the situation. I've been there a lot and sometimes I've managed to win, sometimes I draw and get the 5-way tie and sometimes I've lost and been out of the prizes, but on a % basis, it's worth the gamble. Your rating will suffer a bit but if you're near, say, the cut-off between a major and open, it was a legitimate way of staying in the majors for next season. As for the prizes, on a % basis, if you can win one out of five, then you're somewhat ahead. I won a lot of quite big tournaments so like you, I know how they can be played. People used to avoid MY prep too. I played 1. ... a6 Sicilians and they would play into my hands by playing 2. c3, whereas 3. c4 is better than c3 but the best is probably going to be a g3 Closed Sicilian. They didn't like my Modern Benoni either, because that was the late 90s, before the modern, passive approaches to the MB by white came out.
Reported. You shouldn't do that. It constitutes a threat to others.
I've seen things like this backfire on the people involving themselves with it many times... more often than not, it seems.
I understand what you're saying.