Looking for active play with black

Hi guys, I'm looking for an opening where I get some activity as black. It must be sound, but I don't mind a longterm weakness if I get good compensation.

I'm more of a tactician so I'm looking for an opening that fits my style.

Against e4 I played the french defense but it doesn't fit my style. I'm trying the 2...Nc6 of the sicilian defense right now, with the plan to play e5 soon. Although it weakens my d-pawn I like that I don't have a spatial disadvantage. I'm having trouble though handling the Rossolimo variation properly.

Against d4 I'm not sure what to play either, I'm actually planning on trying the Grunfeld. My usual defense is the QGD, and it's solid but I can't find a lot of counterplay. Usually I find it difficult to get my white bishop in play.

I hope you guys have some suggestions for me :)

Against 1.e4, 1...e5 or the Sicilian are probably the most active. The Scandinavian can give you active piece play as well, but is not quite as good from a theoretical perspective. The sicilian is the most tactical and is ideal for playing to win as black, but it takes far more work than the other openings.

Against 1.d4 you could try the Albin or Chigorin if you really want active piece play from the start, or even the Tarrasch if you like having an IQP. I am pretty sure you won't equalize with any of these if white is super booked up, but then again, how often does that happen? The modern benoni gives black great piece activity at the cost of structural weaknesses, and the Benko gambit will give you a super solid structure and lots of queenside pressure at the cost of a pawn. If you like to attack the king directly than the KID or Leningrad dutch could be for you, though black's play is often more of a slow build up than a tactical melee from the start. The Gruenfeld is quite good if you like to play against a big pawn center. It is a theoretical minefield though, so make sure you know your stuff. The semi-slav can lead to some of the most wild positions I have ever seen, but it can also be very boring. It depends on how white handles it, and there is a tonne of theory for sure.

There are a lot of choices against 1.d4. Try a few of them out in blitz and see what you think. I would suggest the modern benoni or Leningrad dutch if you want to go relatively light on theory, and if you like theory try out the KID, Gruenfeld, or Semi-Slav. Just be aware that the dutch is the most likely to give you a sharp game against lame stuff like the london and colle systems.

 f5 is that dutch defense?

Here's what one book recommends:

(p. 15)
A Study Plan
We have accepted in this book a
broad distinction between two kinds
of chess players, 'positional' and
'combinative'. It is most important
that a player should adopt an opening
which leads to the type of game suited
to his own individual style. Some
players have a flair for combination
and are happiest when conducting an
attack against the enemy king. For
them we recommend, as White,
study of one of the open games from
chapter 3, The Grand Prix Attack
against the Sicilian (p. 65), the Four
Pawns Attack against the King's
Indian (p. 149) and so on. With Black,
the Sicilian Defence and the Yugo-
(p. 16)
slav Variation of the King's Indian
are recommended.
   The other type of player, who pre-
fers a more steady kind of game, with
accumulation of slight advantages
and pressure against definite weak
points in his opponent's game, needs
a different opening repertoire. He
should adopt, as White, the Ruy
Lopez or the Queen's Gambit, the
Averbakh Variation against the
King's Indian (p. 150), the Tarrasch
Variation against the French (p. 81)
etc. With Black he can try the French
or Pirc Defences, according to
whether he prefers blocked or open
positions, while against  1 d4 he
should employ the Nimzo-Indian and
Bogoljubow lines.

Harding, Tim, and Leonard Barden. 1976. Chess Openings for the Average Player. Mineola, New York.

Open and Tactical are NOT synonymous at all!

The Petroff is NOT the most tactical of KP openings.  The QGA is NOT the most tactical of QP openings.

Yes, the QGA leads to a more "open" position than say, the QGD, but the QGA is actually leads to one of the most "dull" middlegames, and activity doesn't win it for you, outmanouvering and taking advantage of a positionally weak move are what turn the tables.

If you really think the Petroff is more "tactical" and "active" than the Sicilian Najdorf, Sicilian Dragon, or Marshall Attack in the Ruy Lopez, or if you really think the QGA is more "tactical" and "active" than the Modern Benoni, Grunfeld, or Leningrad Dutch, you are nuts!

Oh, and I guess based on your theory, of all the variations of the French Defense, the Exchange Variation must be the most tactical because it's the most open and the only variation where Black doesn't have a bad and inactive Light-Squared Bishop, but rather a Bad but Active Bishop!  Same thing goes for the King's Indian Defense - the Exchange Variation must be more tactical than the Mar Del Plata because it's more open, right?

Uhm - being over 300 rating points above you (I'm assuming you are not the Charles from Georgia that is 393) along with about 2380 more games played than you, I think I know the difference between decisive and tactical - I'm not a moron.

Also, many open positions are extremely positional, and many closed positions are full of tactics where the result of the tactics is that the position gets blown open as a result of a piece sac, whether it be a genuine sacrifice or a mere tactical combination.

Common scenario of a closed or semi-closed position where tactics are commonplace are in the Advance French with 5...Qb6 6.a3 c4.  The center is completely blocked, but both White and Black must CONSTANTLY be on the lookout for tactical shots with Nxc4, Bxc4 and Nxd5.  Others occur as well, but these are the most common piece sacrifices for White in that specific line.

And if you think the QGA is loaded with tactics, you haven't seen what a tactical game really is.

And if you don't call a line with an 86.8 percent draw ratio across 53 games "dull", I guess nothing to you is dull:

saying that the both the petrov and QGA are one of the most tactical openings that exist is maybe a stretch too far :) I know a tactical or positional game always depends on what your opponent plays but calling the most drawish openings tactical just seems wrong... You just can't expect a win when your opening gives rise to zero position imbalances and a perfect symmetrical pawn structure, and in the case of the line thriller provided, queens come off.  
 On the other hand a rating argument is never an argument ;)

ruben72d - the whole point of the reference to rating had nothing to do with arguing rating, but rather that the fool should not be assuming stupidity from or talking down to far superior players.

If you look at many other posts, he basically views himself as a know-it-all.  A know-it-all that really does know-it-all wouldn't having a rating of 1776 and have only played 20 games over the board in his lifetime, and be trying to call out a 2100 player that has played roughly 2400 games.

In other words, I'm completely calling him out.

I don't find the position at #11 dull/drawish at all.

It would be foolish to do so, since I have played it as white in five OTB games and two correspondence (engines on) games, and I have scored 100%.

It's probably just a matter of taste, but I think 7...Bxc5 is more exact a move than 7...Qxd1 which gives white good chances for a pull without any risk.

But anyway: The position is not drawish, but certainly enough not sharp, either...

QGA expert Sergei Rublevsky has played it many times, so there is "something" to it. It's playable, but Black needs to defend patiently for many moves. It's also a position where engine analysis does not help much- whites queenside bind plan goes many moves down the tree.

I like playing such positions with white. The right plan is fairly standard and well-layed out, while Black must suffer for many moves. Here is a typical "torture exercise":

Black resigned after consulting Houdini, who claims Black is dead lost. In reality, the position is a draw, but forming the right defensive plan (kingside fortress) is not at all easy... even more so in OTB chess. Being on the ropes for many moves can reduce your defensive skills, even in correspondence chess, where plenty of time is available.

Well that does happen sometimes. If one side is way behind in development in a closed position and the other side has all their pieces out, you can often sac a piece for two pawns or something and get inside their position.

I might have missed whatever joke there was here haha, but anyway that does happen.

"Open and Tactical are NOT synonymous at all!"

I mean, not completely synonymous, but I would say to a decent extent synonymous. Even in the QGA, it's pretty easy to make a tactical mistake because there are so many little squares or forks you can hang. I mean, sure, you might be able to find some position that's slightly more closed and is more tactical than some open position, but the more tactical position will usually be the more open one. Bishops and rooks will have to be worried about much more when they have open lines, crap can fly all over the place on the open lines haha.

Closed positions can get really tactical, but sort of in a different way. You manuever for a while, then sometimes the tactics sort of explode suddenly when someone makes a pawn break. Fair enough, but in open positions there are tactics on pretty much every move or two.

None of the super GMs ever seem to play it anymore though. It's mainly either a berlin endgame, or a berlin sideline :)

Two of the most tactical openings I know: KID Mar del Plata, French Winawer Poisoned Pawn. Both openings feature a "fixed" pawn center!

It is best to get your opponent on YOUR TURF first when playing black.Having played the Dragon for over half century, I obviously am comfortable in such positions. There are "dry" openings and "dynamic" opening...for both white and black.A lot depends on your style of play and knowledge of the overall game. Non-masters usually look at moves.Masters and higher often look at finding the right IDEA instead. Once that is done, the "right" move makes itself easily known :) .

And about the draw rate in the qga. Well just like with any stats we have to think what might create those. It might be that the people playing it don't feel like fighting (perhaps because of the widespread belief that the qga is a drawing opening). But if you got some really fighting players and forced them into a qga, you might have many more decisive results. Yeah the draw rate might still be high, but perhaps not nearly as high as it is.

I think I saw once that the french exchange had a higher win rate for black than white. But that's more of a statement about the type of people who wanted to play that position for white (which can be more of a statement about psychology), rather than the merit of the position itself.

Yeah I wouldn't say tactical must mean "interesting," or "double edged." You can have a tactical position that's meant to peter out to a draw or something like that. As long as it has tactics lol.

"this is why you see people who specialize in such openings also specialize in endgame technique"

That's a good insight. Anyway I think people perhaps associate "tactics" too much with "double edged." I feel like the complexity of the sicilian, let's say, is just the double edged nature of it. Not so much that there are inherently more tactics or something. You just have both sides pursuing very different, opposed plans, and you have to balance defending against theirs with moving forward with your own.

The careless use of terminology definitely used to confuse me. I would think the sicilian is inherently tactical, yet you have openings like the kan that are super positionally motivated, delaying development, trying to use the central majority, gain space on the queenside, all pretty positional stuff. It can get quite tactical obviously, as almost anything can, but a lot of the sicilian is based on so many nuanced positional concepts that it's very misleading to put the sicilian in a separate category from the "quiet, positional" openings. For one thing, positional need not be quiet at all. Positional battles can be very double edged.

Uhm - I have no clue what on earth you are talkinga bout, or how you think it's comedy.

Last time I looked, White pawns on c3, d4, and e5, with Black pawns on c4, d5, and e6 would be classified as closed, even outright "blocked".  This of course can come via 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.c3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Qb6 6.a3 c4 - one of my favorite opening lines to play from the White side with "near perfect" results.

All it takes is a Knight or Bishop sac on c4 or a Knight sac on d5 to rip the whole position open in specific cases where there is a tactical combination available to White, usually due to a subtle error by Black.

So no, there is nothing "funny" about it.  It's just a simple fact.  I don't know what it is you drink before you post to this site, but apparently it's something at least 100-proof minimum!  The only "point" it proves is how dumb you really are!

Maybe the word "dull" was the wrong choice of words.  Drawish I think is accurate though, especially when the draw ratio is over 86 percent across a "valid sample size" (in statistics, you need 30 for a valid sample).

However, when Mr. Naive (a.k.a. FiveofSwords) goes around saying that the QGA and Petroff are the most tactical defenses, and you start comparing the position in post 11 to openings like the Sicilian Najdorf with 6.Bg5, or the Perenyi Attack, or the Modern Benoni Flick Knife Attack, the position from the QGA is a lot "duller" than the lines from the 3 said openings.  Sure it's not "London Dull", but I had intended it to be "relatively speaking".