Right. ...I find sicilian is by far the most aggressive opening.
Most Aggressive Openings?
Sort:
Oct 22, 2014
0
#63
I feel like going on a bumping spree, bumping every dead thread that I find interesting.
My agressometer never goes above 2
SmyslovFan wrote:
Judging by this list, "aggressive" means "not quite sound, but if I throw away a pawn in the opening, I feel like I'm attacking".
For White, the more aggressive lines are not ones that peter out to dull equality after 20 moves, they are openings that give white nasty attacking chances throughout the game.
Some aggressive openings for White include the Two Knights, the Botvinnik Variation of the Queen's Gambit, and the main line of the Spanish.
In each of those, white maintains dangerous attacking chances throughout the game and Black needs to be extremely careful not to be blown out, not just on the first few moves, but deep into the middle game.
Take a look at this opening and learn just how aggressive the Queen's gambit can be!
You're quite welcome to share your philosophy about what opening strategies are most effective or theoretically most pristine, but that horse has been beaten plenty times. Nobody is suggesting the SMG or BDG are better than the mainlines. Of course the Queens gambit and open Sicilian are theoretically better at gaining an advantage with best play. The point of most gambits is to try for a practical chances rather than theoretical superiority.
It seems to me the point of the thread is really what are the most committal openings that are still playable? If it's not committal, it's not aggressive. Sure, tactics and double edged play can arise from noncommittal openings but that is far less likely to happen. I could find Caro-Kann or Petrov games that became mad scrambles.
-BEES- wrote:
SmyslovFan wrote:
Judging by this list, "aggressive" means "not quite sound, but if I throw away a pawn in the opening, I feel like I'm attacking".
For White, the more aggressive lines are not ones that peter out to dull equality after 20 moves, they are openings that give white nasty attacking chances throughout the game.
Some aggressive openings for White include the Two Knights, the Botvinnik Variation of the Queen's Gambit, and the main line of the Spanish.
In each of those, white maintains dangerous attacking chances throughout the game and Black needs to be extremely careful not to be blown out, not just on the first few moves, but deep into the middle game.
Take a look at this opening and learn just how aggressive the Queen's gambit can be!
You're quite welcome to share your philosophy about what opening strategies are most effective or theoretically most pristine, but that horse has been beaten plenty times. Nobody is suggesting the SMG or BDG are better than the mainlines. Of course the Queens gambit and open Sicilian are theoretically better at gaining an advantage with best play. The point of most gambits is to try for a practical chances rather than theoretical superiority.
It seems to me the point of the thread is really what are the most committal openings that are still playable? If it's not committal, it's not aggressive. Sure, tactics and double edged play can arise from noncommittal openings but that is far less likely to happen. I could find Caro-Kann or Petrov games that became mad scrambles.
I played the English last night and won a Bishop for a Pawn due to a 4 move tactic. One of the reasons i like playing the English. Its "boring", and can have fireworks too. Also...I always look forward to playing someone that always complains about how "boring" an opening is. Its like free points...
Oct 22, 2014
0
#67
Playing crazy gambits don't give you more practical chances than something more standard like the Ruy or the Scotch etc. If you're playing against a beginner, you can play any opening move and you'll still probably win.
Oct 22, 2014
0
#68
Funny thing is when a grandmaster wants a draw really badly with black and their opponent plays e4, their first choice will be e5.
Nice username!
Oct 22, 2014
0
#70
Wing gambit isn't really aggressive, just bad, but the Kings gambit is pretty darn aggressive and attacks the king right away..
lolurspammed wrote:
Playing crazy gambits don't give you more practical chances than something more standard like the Ruy or the Scotch etc. If you're playing against a beginner, you can play any opening move and you'll still probably win.
The practical chances don't come from the type of opening so much as they come from playing an opening you've studied for 10 years and your opponent studied for 1 day. It can be a garbage opening but if you need to know theory 20 moves in to prove it, that "refutation" you picked up off of OnlineChessLessons will be woefully insufficient at a high level.
As for people who complain about boring openings... I'm not one of them. Quite happy to play the London system or the Berlin Defense from time to time.
I think 1.e4 is the most agressive with 1.d4 coming in second.
lolurspammed hat geschrieben:
Playing crazy gambits don't give you more practical chances than something more standard like the Ruy or the Scotch etc. If you're playing against a beginner, you can play any opening move and you'll still probably win.
i think i can play any opening to win against an expert like you are...
Oct 22, 2014
0
#74
You would have better chance winning with something that doesn't make you worse by much.
Oct 22, 2014
0
#75
Here's a thought: take a look at the openings with the highest win percents. For White, one of the best openings is when Black plays the Latvian!
One line that looks good for white statistically is the Goring Gambit. White gets a classic attack and good winning chances. In my database, White scores 58% (the average opening scores ~54%), with only 22% of the games being drawn (the average is 30%).
I'm not claiming the Goring is better than the main lines. I am claiming that it's a pretty decent aggressive line.
By comparison, the Evans isn't particularly aggressive. It scores 39% wins, 38% draws and 23% Black wins against all opposition. White's winning chances drop dramatically when higher rated players only are considered. Black actually has a plus score when only master games are considered! The Evans turns out to be far more drawish than the average opening!
It's possible to play aggressively and still play for the win. Openings that jettison pawns for no good reason are generally good, for the other side. Take a look at the stats on the Latvian for just one example.
I do not have the competence to judge this but I believe to have read
that most open sicilian variants are regarded as fairly aggressive
and especially variants like sicilian dragon-yugoslav attack and the like
are regarded as extremely sharp..
Oct 22, 2014
0
#78
This is hard to say because do you mean the most aggressive opening that you can play every game or do you mean most aggressive variation if your opponent plays the right moves? If it doesn't matter it's the Traxler Counter Attack hands down. It's so aggressive that Houdini places the opponent +3 right after the opening! It's an opening for black, here it is...
Yes, this is actually book. Isn't that just too aggressive or what?? I'll love all your opinions!
Atomic_Rift wrote:
This is hard to say because do you mean the most aggressive opening that you can play every game or do you mean most aggressive variation if your opponent plays the right moves? If it doesn't matter it's the Traxler Counter Attack hands down. It's so aggressive that Houdini places the opponent +3 right after the opening! It's an opening for black, here it is...
Yes, this is actually book. Isn't that just too aggressive or what?? I'll love all your opinions!
Sacrificing material doesn't symbolize that the opening will be incredibly tactical. For example the main line of the elephant gambit is not as sharp as a Bg5 najdorf usually, or even a winawer french.