ewwwwwww
I've Fallen In Love With The Colle
Sort:
While I have no intention to play the Colle, I always was curious about that "Zuke em" book by David Rudel. I'm sure I will order it some day just for the heck of it.
The Colle is for players who find the london too risky.
But it is a great way to try for equality as white.
"and in the Colle Main Line, you often get a chance to grab the initiative..."
You have white, you already have the initiative.
UnratedGamesOnly wrote:
"and in the Colle Main Line, you often get a chance to grab the initiative..."
You have white, you already have the initiative.
Unless you play the Colle.
Feb 10, 2012
0
#9
It should have been the Zukertort-Yusopov version of the Colle.
mrguy888 wrote:
UnratedGamesOnly wrote:
"and in the Colle Main Line, you often get a chance to grab the initiative..."
You have white, you already have the initiative.
Unless you play the Colle.
LOL...My apologies...the obvious some times escapes me.
bored
GargleBlaster wrote:
Is that sort of thing legal in Singapore? :)
The Bongcloud's banned, but there's a loophole allowing me to play the Colle.
For those who say the Colle is boring, I doubt you've actually played it. It allows White some chances for a middlegame attack.
wow, SOME chances? That's what I want in an opening as white . . .
PrawnEatsPrawn wrote:
God. Story of my life.
The Colle isn't very effective against the King's Indian or Dutch.....
uhohspaghettio wrote:
The Colle is basically the QGD in reverse, one of the most boring of all openings in chess.... in fact the opening that nearly killed chess, notorious for stagnant draws, and was theorized by Capablanca and others to possibly end up as a forced draw.
Not at the club level. At the club level it's a surprise opening that leads to intense matches. I'm telling you this from experience.
Sure, it's harmless at GM level, but in casual OTB it's fairly good.
Anyway, it can't be worse than the Frankenstein-Dracula.
Feb 11, 2012
0
#17
I love the Frankenstein-Dracula. Btw, I find it embarrasing to comment on this thread and then see on the chess.com sidebar: "I've Fallen In Love with the Colle - by GargleBlaster"
I think we can all agree that uhohspaghettio exaggerates his opinion for effect. A few things to note:
1. His ability in opening theory is not very strong.
2. Declaring the Colle a stagnant opening seems way exaggerated, especially when it gives black such an active game. The London System and the Stonewall for white are much more static and "boring".
3. "... and was theorized by Capablanca and others to possibly end in a forced draw."
Anyways...
I find the comparison of the Colle to the Frankenstein-Dracula to be an odd one. The Colle comes out of 1 P-Q4 while the Frankenstein-Dracula comes out of 1 P-K4. In addition, the Colle is pretty established in its reputation, while the Frankenstein-Dracula is still unclear for the most part. There have been some updates to the latter line's theory, but it is still a mess.
To conclude, a comparison of the two variations objectively is not necessarily useful.
Postscript: I do enjoy playing the Frankenstein-Dracula variation. It is a shame that it rarely comes up since both players have to cooperate to set it up.
pfren wrote:
If THAT opening is "good", then I fail to spot why the Colle isn't.
I guess we have to distinguish between the Colle opening and the Colle system. The Colle queen's pawn opening may be ok, but the system as played against anything is certainly not.
Because of its lack of variations and theory... and in the Colle Main Line, you often get a chance to grab the initiative and start increasing pressure until your opponent cracks, which always appeals to me.
The Colle Main Line: