The Petroff is very easy to learn, as I said I can give u some lines.
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 nc6 is also easy if you do what I do, which is:
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6
3.Bc4 Nf6- Ulvestad (I think u know that one)
3.d4 exd4- ...Bc5 Scotch
3.Bb5 Nf6- Beverwijk( see game)
Don't assume that "Solid" and "Positional" are synonomous.
The Caro-Kann is "Solid" in the sense that Black doesn't create any immediate weaknesses. He is willing to take on a slightly cramped position in order to avoid targets for White. For example, in the Najdorf, d6 is often a problem. In the French, e6 is often a problem. No such issues exists in the Caro-Kann.
In return, you usually have to deal with a space disadvantage. As described, a "solid" and "compact" position.
There are still tons of tactics and tons of positional ideas in the Caro-Kann. Trust me, it's my primary defense to 1.e4.
As for 1...e5, my secondary defense to 1.e4, while the position is more "open" than the Caro-Kann, it's still "Solid" like the Caro-Kann. The main difference is that the positions are more open. You don't get the blocked center that you get in the Advance Caro-Kann, or the Semi-Open positions of the main line Caro-Kann. Take the Petroff or the Berlin Defense, two very solid defenses to 1.e4. The Petroff you are constantly a tempo behind in a solid position that may be symmetrical or assymetrical. In the Berlin, you lose castling rights, and aim to keep dominant control over g4, to make f5 hard to get in since e5 has already been played.
All of these are different than say, the Najdorf Sicilian or French Defense, where both of them Black creates a more hostile position, but in return, he has marked weaknesses in his position.
No matter what you play against 1.e4, you will have a disadvantage of some sort. That's part of playing Black. It's a question of what disadvantage you want. Clearly, you'll take a disadvantage in space over having a marked weakness.
Now the main question is, are you more comfortable with positions that are wide open, or somewhat closed? In both cases, you get a solid position where positional and tactical knowledge are still critical.
If you prefer a more open position, play 1...e5.
If you prefer a more restrained position, play 1...c6.
I play both, though I play 1...c6 far more frequently than 1...e5, but it's strictly a matter of taste.
The Petroff is very easy to learn, as I said I can give u some lines.
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 nc6 is also easy if you do what I do, which is:
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6
3.Bc4 Nf6- Ulvestad (I think u know that one)
3.d4 exd4- ...Bc5 Scotch
3.Bb5 Nf6- Beverwijk( see game)
1. The Ulvestad/ Fritz is definitely better for white... but fortunately enough the ...Na5 variation is just fine.
2. The Beverwijk is certainly more solid, but I do not know any safe way for Black to equalize after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 4.Bb5 Nf6 4.0-0 Bc5 (4...Nxe4! aiming for a Berlin proper is almost certainly better) 5.Nxe5.
I'd say the carokann is the harder of the two openings to learn because the vast majority of players are taught to play 1. e4 e5 when just starting out so those kind of positions will make more sense. When playing the carokann you'll have to play a different kind of chess than youre used to. Also the carokann has lots of theory and variations, it also involves playing in a myriad of different pawn structures and play styles.
The Petroff is very easy to learn, as I said I can give u some lines.
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 nc6 is also easy if you do what I do, which is:
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6
3.Bc4 Nf6- Ulvestad (I think u know that one)
3.d4 exd4- ...Bc5 Scotch
3.Bb5 Nf6- Beverwijk( see game)
1. The Ulvestad/ Fritz is definitely better for white... but fortunately enough the ...Na5 variation is just fine.
2. The Beverwijk is certainly more solid, but I do not know any safe way for Black to equalize after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.0-0 Bc5 (4...Nxe4! aiming for a Berlin proper is almost certainly better) 5.Nxe5.
Na5 is just fine, I may keep the ulvestad for blitz.
1.e4 e5 2.nf3 nc6 4.bb5 Nf6 4.0-0 Bc5 5.Nxe5 Nxe5 6,d4 c6 7.Be2 Be7 8.de5 Ne4 9.Qd4 Nc5 is at most +=
1.e4 e5 2.nf3 nc6 4.bb5 Nf6 4.0-0 Bc5 5.Nxe5 Nxe5 6,d4 c6 7.Be2 Be7 8.de5 Ne4 9.Qd4 Nc5 is at most +=
6...c6 is surely enough the worst of Black's three possibilities (the other two being 6...a6 and 5...Nxe4).
Black has definite problems in both variations.
PS: Black is probably OK after 13.Bf5 (GM Ivan Sokolov's recommendation) Rhe8, but 13.Bf4 is better for white. There is also 11.Bf5 0-0 12.Bxe6 fe6 and now not 13.Rxe6? but rather 13.Nc3 Bxd6 14.Qe2.
OK, I won't argue with you anymore, thanks for the analysis.
One final point: What is wrong with Bf5, on the eleventh move.
OK, I won't argue with you anymore, thanks for the analysis.
One final point: What is wrong with Bf5, on the eleventh move.
If you mean white's eleventh, nothing... I have just mistyped the move numbering. But white can't take the pawn on e6, Black gains too much play.
Don't assume that "Solid" and "Positional" are synonomous.
The Caro-Kann is "Solid" in the sense that Black doesn't create any immediate weaknesses. He is willing to take on a slightly cramped position in order to avoid targets for White. For example, in the Najdorf, d6 is often a problem. In the French, e6 is often a problem. No such issues exists in the Caro-Kann.
In return, you usually have to deal with a space disadvantage. As described, a "solid" and "compact" position.
There are still tons of tactics and tons of positional ideas in the Caro-Kann. Trust me, it's my primary defense to 1.e4.
As for 1...e5, my secondary defense to 1.e4, while the position is more "open" than the Caro-Kann, it's still "Solid" like the Caro-Kann. The main difference is that the positions are more open. You don't get the blocked center that you get in the Advance Caro-Kann, or the Semi-Open positions of the main line Caro-Kann. Take the Petroff or the Berlin Defense, two very solid defenses to 1.e4. The Petroff you are constantly a tempo behind in a solid position that may be symmetrical or assymetrical. In the Berlin, you lose castling rights, and aim to keep dominant control over g4, to make f5 hard to get in since e5 has already been played.
All of these are different than say, the Najdorf Sicilian or French Defense, where both of them Black creates a more hostile position, but in return, he has marked weaknesses in his position.
No matter what you play against 1.e4, you will have a disadvantage of some sort. That's part of playing Black. It's a question of what disadvantage you want. Clearly, you'll take a disadvantage in space over having a marked weakness.
Now the main question is, are you more comfortable with positions that are wide open, or somewhat closed? In both cases, you get a solid position where positional and tactical knowledge are still critical.
If you prefer a more open position, play 1...e5.
If you prefer a more restrained position, play 1...c6.
I play both, though I play 1...c6 far more frequently than 1...e5, but it's strictly a matter of taste.
Thank you ! That was really useful ! So, I am probably going to opt for 1...e5 
Don't assume that "Solid" and "Positional" are synonomous.
The Caro-Kann is "Solid" in the sense that Black doesn't create any immediate weaknesses. He is willing to take on a slightly cramped position in order to avoid targets for White. For example, in the Najdorf, d6 is often a problem. In the French, e6 is often a problem. No such issues exists in the Caro-Kann.
In return, you usually have to deal with a space disadvantage. As described, a "solid" and "compact" position.
There are still tons of tactics and tons of positional ideas in the Caro-Kann. Trust me, it's my primary defense to 1.e4.
As for 1...e5, my secondary defense to 1.e4, while the position is more "open" than the Caro-Kann, it's still "Solid" like the Caro-Kann. The main difference is that the positions are more open. You don't get the blocked center that you get in the Advance Caro-Kann, or the Semi-Open positions of the main line Caro-Kann. Take the Petroff or the Berlin Defense, two very solid defenses to 1.e4. The Petroff you are constantly a tempo behind in a solid position that may be symmetrical or assymetrical. In the Berlin, you lose castling rights, and aim to keep dominant control over g4, to make f5 hard to get in since e5 has already been played.
All of these are different than say, the Najdorf Sicilian or French Defense, where both of them Black creates a more hostile position, but in return, he has marked weaknesses in his position.
No matter what you play against 1.e4, you will have a disadvantage of some sort. That's part of playing Black. It's a question of what disadvantage you want. Clearly, you'll take a disadvantage in space over having a marked weakness.
Now the main question is, are you more comfortable with positions that are wide open, or somewhat closed? In both cases, you get a solid position where positional and tactical knowledge are still critical.
If you prefer a more open position, play 1...e5.
If you prefer a more restrained position, play 1...c6.
I play both, though I play 1...c6 far more frequently than 1...e5, but it's strictly a matter of taste.
Thank you ! That was really useful ! So, I am probably going to opt for 1...e5
1...e5 is not one opening!!! What next?
All great coaches from the former Soviet Union that produced hundreds of powerful and serious grandmasters,in their books advise that one of their students' two main defences should be 1... e5. The richness of strategic and tactical positions is what teaches a young student chess. (The second,they say,should be either the French or the Sicilian.)
Furthermore ,you can limit the study of theory to the White responses.For example,if you want to avoid the Italian and the Evans Gambit altogether, you can play 3. ..Nf6 to White's 3.Bc4,which is not only very interesting but if you analyse it well,also quite ambitious.
The Scotch game offers Black a lot winning chances,so no problem there.
Thank you !
Don't assume that "Solid" and "Positional" are synonomous.
The Caro-Kann is "Solid" in the sense that Black doesn't create any immediate weaknesses. He is willing to take on a slightly cramped position in order to avoid targets for White. For example, in the Najdorf, d6 is often a problem. In the French, e6 is often a problem. No such issues exists in the Caro-Kann.
In return, you usually have to deal with a space disadvantage. As described, a "solid" and "compact" position.
There are still tons of tactics and tons of positional ideas in the Caro-Kann. Trust me, it's my primary defense to 1.e4.
As for 1...e5, my secondary defense to 1.e4, while the position is more "open" than the Caro-Kann, it's still "Solid" like the Caro-Kann. The main difference is that the positions are more open. You don't get the blocked center that you get in the Advance Caro-Kann, or the Semi-Open positions of the main line Caro-Kann. Take the Petroff or the Berlin Defense, two very solid defenses to 1.e4. The Petroff you are constantly a tempo behind in a solid position that may be symmetrical or assymetrical. In the Berlin, you lose castling rights, and aim to keep dominant control over g4, to make f5 hard to get in since e5 has already been played.
All of these are different than say, the Najdorf Sicilian or French Defense, where both of them Black creates a more hostile position, but in return, he has marked weaknesses in his position.
No matter what you play against 1.e4, you will have a disadvantage of some sort. That's part of playing Black. It's a question of what disadvantage you want. Clearly, you'll take a disadvantage in space over having a marked weakness.
Now the main question is, are you more comfortable with positions that are wide open, or somewhat closed? In both cases, you get a solid position where positional and tactical knowledge are still critical.
If you prefer a more open position, play 1...e5.
If you prefer a more restrained position, play 1...c6.
I play both, though I play 1...c6 far more frequently than 1...e5, but it's strictly a matter of taste.
Thank you ! That was really useful ! So, I am probably going to opt for 1...e5
1...e5 is not one opening!!! What next?
Maybe 2...Nc6
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 you have to be ready for:
3.Bb5
3.d4
3.Bc4
Yes, these are the openings that I have to be prepared for ! Spanish, Italian, Evans' Gambit, Scotch game and Scotch gambit ! But I think that I can learn some good variations against each of them !
Scotch Gambit is the most dangerous, and a close second is Evans' (not Evan's) Gambit.
i think in 1.e4 e5 most people find what they are searching or. black has many lines to choose from that fits most peoples playingstyles. they say white has many choices but you will find out its not that hard to prepare for as people think unless you choose really tricky lines
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 you have to be ready for:
3.Bb5
3.d4
3.Bc4
You can play d6 against all of them if you want. In the Scotch you just play 3...ed 4.Nxd4 d6.
A general question:
Which of those two openings do you think is the easiest to learn ?
I think e5 is by far the easiest opening to learn. And the most difficult on the same time.
First, a study in non-lopez lines, which should allow you to get a playable position against them. Not hoping for advantage, maybe not even for equality against the Scotch and the Italian game, but a position where all 3 results is possible.
Then, find a defence you would like to defend against the ruy lopez. Closed systems is by far the most complicated, but also teaches you alot about chess in general, and you will have an opening for lifetime.
Then the most important part: STICK TO IT. I've played 1.. e5 for 6 months, and only once (out of 9 games with 2+ hours to each player) I got out of the position worse. And there I got a position where I could outplay my opponent. He played a few mistakes, and then it was black who fought for the win. Both players made a few mistakes in time trouble, but I won in the end. Only once the game was drawn, and that was definetly because of my tactical abilities.
Here is some tactical puzzles from my e4 e5 games as black: