is a black london good against d4?

I mean some openings basically slap a label of “theoretical knowledge optional” and if you play good chess you can make it work.

It's not a good way for black to play the Slav but black isn't losing yet. However, one more weak move .... I don't know why white should play 4. Nf3. That seems very weak. The way forward for white is probably 4. cd.

You literally said that openings without forcing lines are more complicated than those with forcing lines. Seems like you have trouble remembering what you write

And I explained that point. Apparently reading comprehension is something you need to work on. I did not claim the Caro was more complex than the Sicilian (that was your strawman). I said that avoiding the openings with a direct confrontational nature would lead you to a strategic battle, where the consequences for decisions would not be as obvious (and thus would require a deeper understanding). Since you brought up the Sicilian, in many lines, you are literally forced to find the right move because all other moves fail tactically. When you play something like the English (as an example), that is not the case. Would you say the English is less complicated than the Sicilian? I would argue it is no more, nor no less complicated, but the complications are of a different nature. You seem to prefer the more strategic positions, which is fine. That doesn't take away from their complexity, it just changed where that complexity resides.

But I do not expect someone who is this dogmatic to understand that nuance.

The Sicilian Najdorf isn't very forcing at all. It's incredibly flexible, especially far more so than the Caro Kann which is a very rigid structure.

This is the contradiction of Najdorf haters. "Najdorf is so forcing and theoretical." then "Najdorf has too much variety."

Yes, I would say the English is far less complicated than th Sicillian. But you know more than me since you're so good at chess, right?

It's not really a contradiction. The issue is that later parts (moves 15-30) of some variations are incredibly forcing, sometimes requiring you to find precise moves to stay alive (talking about the sharp Be3 and Bg5 lines), but it's difficult to memorize all these variations particularly because the opening is so flexible and both sides have so many options early in the opening.

Time to get to your homework as there is no further need to continue this discussion. You will hold to your dogmatic view until a GM tells you otherwise (for those interested, Marin discusses this in the opening chapters in his first of 3 books on the English).

Every time you comment there's a huge spider... here's a better animal for your pfp. Shows off your big brain instead of your poisonous spider nasty whatever it is.

-

-

Ah, so that's what you're trying to pull here. You're just spouting stuff you read from books/watched in videos, aren't you? Now I know what llama was referring to, you're just here to pick fights with people beacuse you think you know everything. News flash, people write chess books to make money, not to teach chess accurately. Just because Marin says something doesn't mean it's entirely true (and the same is true for anything I say). Complexity of an opening is fairly subjective, after all, depending on what lines you prefer and what positions you prefer. But if you want to keep arguing about things you don't understand, be my guest.

I am not the one claiming to know everything here. I also did not pick this fight. I asked a question; you decided to be an arrogant and condescending teenage prick. I simply pointed out your thinking lacked nuance.

But if you think people only write books to make money, that would explain your aversion to reading. It would do you good to open your mind a bit. The only thing you have said that is remotely accurate in this discussion is "doesn't mean it's entirely true ...," So there may be hope for you yet, but it may take a few years for you to grow up.

"I also did not pick this fight" really seems like your memory has some issues... all I did was clarify my statements, you were the one who decided to start the insult chain lol

I have also read hundreds of chess books, would not be making generalized statements if I had not. I will not make blind assumptions about how much you read, but considering your chess level, it can't be very high. You're the one who needs to open your mind, I literally just stated my opinions on a subjective matter and you decided to attack me for it (which I'm totally down for tbf lol)

yall gotta chill out!!!

hey now, the forums would be so dry without trolling and pointless arguments

This isn't true. I know these lines and there are multiple deviations at several points. It funnels out massively.

Even in the main line English Attack it's shown that there are actually multiple good moves at each point. On top of the fact that entering the main line English Attack isn't even forced in itself as black can play the Scheveningen or Anti-English.

Bg5 Najdorf I play from both colours and it's not very forcing at all. Black can adopt several different setups which are all completely fine and there are multiple good moves at each point. Even in the Poisoned Pawn variation, it branches out. Entering the Poisoned Pawn isn't even forced and can be avoided.

This idea that the Najdorf is a forced sequence of only moves is just a lie. The people who say this are generally people who don't play the Najdorf so they try to discourage others through myths and fearmongering.

It is difficult to memorise all these variations. That's why you don't have to right away and just play chess. It's the same for the opponent. I don't know how it is at your level but plenty of people can just play it and learn as they go without memorising all these variations and theory.

You can't tell me what to do. You don't know me.

🤣

I play the same with Black, for the same reasons.

With White I went for a more Kasparov-y repertoire than an Avrukh-y one.

If you were to pick second line defences with the Black pieces, to be more of a moving target in terms of opponents preparing against you what would you pick? ( for me vs 1. d4 probably Nimzo+QID , for 1.e4 probably either 1. ..e5 or the French )

Congrats on making it to IM at 17 !

well I have never really played Najdorf as black seriously (and as white I would play Sozin which doesn't have that much theory) so I won't argue with you about the nature of Najdorf theory, but in my experience (I played Scheveningen and Taimanov a lot), if you just "play and learn as you go" in the sicillian without memorizing lines, you get killed. This doesn't necessarily mean moves are forced; the problem is that making a mistake is easy and very costly compared to more solid openings. This is why I don't know a lot of players at a strong but subprofessional level who play Najdorf (considering how strong an opening it is, you'd think many people would play it, but that's simply not the case), because it takes a lot of memorization and it's difficult to play.

I have never needed a second line. It's enough to know one line very well. I guess I would use Taimanov and KID though since I played both extensively in the past, but I can't really think of many situations where I would use them over my main repertoire

btw I'm 16 not 17 lol