My best,most complete, repertoire….

Sort:
Krames
With white, e4 and then:
*Ruy Lopez against e5, sometimes w d3, sometimes without, depends on black.
*nc3 against anything else. Closed Sicilian, Grand Prix ideas. With f4,f5 being my major goal.

With black it’s e6 against anything and then French if it’s e4,d4. And stonewall Dutch against just about anything else. Yeah, sometimes the stonewall doesn’t make perfect sense, and I’ll go in a different direction, but it’s solid more times than not. I love the exchange French and just play that as it goes, play for a Winawer against nc3, and Rubenstien v the Tarrasch.

At around 1600 rapid, these seem like they give me more than enough to learn and study and pursue.

Just figured I’d share…..
Krames
Lol
Krames

Just silly

jamesstack

If you like the exchange french there is a very interesting book "Exchange French comes to Life" by Alex Fishbein, Also another book that has good analysis of the exchange french is "playing the Petroff: a bulletproof repertoire" by Swapnil Dhopade. However, after studying these books and playing some games on ICCF I don't really think white has anything against precise play by black. But if black makes some slightly inaccurate moves or isn'r up to speed on IQP positions, then you can win some interesting games with it.

AvroVanquish

Nice Attacking openings. 

Krames

@jamesstacck . . . Thanks for the book recomendations!

Looking them both up now and I tend ro agree, I don't think white has much with the exchange. And at my level of chess, its almost never a draw.

 

 

jamesstack

Your welcome happy.png

 

AviSinha3000

Hmmm

gik-tally

QUOTE: Nice Attacking openings. 

ANYONE that calls the stonewall an attacking opening hasn't played it! i'm a positionally stupid ATTACKER and all those pawns in the way drove me nuts. it, and the closed scandinavian, 1.e4 d5 2.e5, drove me so nuts i quit playing because no one would make the book study tool i BEGGED bookup & chessbase etc. to make that works with TREES like opening explorers use. variations within variations within variations style notation is as counter intuitive as old school every square has 2 names chess notation.

i WILL get to learning the albin counter gambit and others so i never have to stonewall ever again. it does not suit tacticians. it's POSITIONAL