Nakamura Openings

Does anyone have some good examples of Nakamura blitz or bullet openings? I heard they are simple, easy, and effective, and can be used in slower games. I already looked on chessgames.com and could find what I was looking for.

Looking for both White and Black openings of his, please.

One person gave me one example:

d3-Nd2-g3-Bg2-Ngf3-e4-Re1

No, but this was recommended to me for something simple and effective.

I don't play blitz.

Nakamura has a slight rating edge on you about 1400 points. That might mean something, hard to tell. lol. He beat my near GM friend in bullet something like 38-6. The guy he beat destroys me in every time control. 

Adams isn't even close to Nakamura when it comes to blitz chess.  Naka is more than  100 points stronger in blitz.

Yeah, the KIA is simple, for the first 8 moves or so. Then you have to play a game of chess.

I agree with Olympian, the "secret" is knowing how to play well.

1. Nakamura and Adams are about even.  Thier record is +1 -2 =4 in Adams favor.  He's only one game ahead, and they have only played 7.  Naka is currenlty #3 in the world, Adams has only ever achieved #4.  I will concede the fact that he has been in several candidate matches, but I would say the Championship Cycle is not an accurate reflection of playing strength because if it was, Anand wouldn't have challenged Carlesn this time around.

2.  Now to answer the actual question.  as far has Naka's blitz openings the only "simple" ones he really using is either the King's Indian Attack which is what you listed in the original post, and the London/Colle/Torre/Trompowski complex of openings which opens 1. d4 and each system depends on where you put the queen's bishop on move 2.  If you move it to f4, the London, g5 Torre/Trompowski, Leave it on the home square, Colle.  The other system he uses is the English which can be played like the King's Indian Attack.  All of these systems have similar placement of the pieces, no matter what black plays and the rest of the game is generally positional.  For black, it looks like he is using normal high level openings like hte grunfeld, Queen's Gambit etc.

There is a great book on the englsih called The Dynamic English which focuses on where you put the pieces more than move order.  Read the Playing the London System by Cyrus Lakdawala for the London System.  He has also written a Move by Move book on the Colle System for Everyman Chess.  Hope that helps.

-1

Thanks.

If you are only looking for openings in blitz then in yesterday's death match against GM Weisley,

With Black Naka played Berlin Defense a lot

With White, d4 opening

But you should also know that GMs change there openings frequently to side step their opponents preparation.

who won the deathmatch between nakamura and Wesley?

From a GM standpoint, those blitz and bullet openings are patzer moves compared to standard play. GM or no GM, can't believe anyone would take this poppycock seriously.

The London system isnt a patzer opening. It's very playable for white.

It's not a patzer opening in the sense that it's bad, but in the sense that patzers love openings that are extremely difficult to fk up in the first 10 moves.

The London is also not a Patzer Opening because it was used by both Petrosian and Kasparov.  And anyone who calls either of them a Patzer is just drunk or something.  Kamsky uses it all the time and considering he's the current US Champion, has been a total of FIVE times, was ranked 4th in the world, had a peak ranking of 2763, and either challenged for the world championship or was in the candidates tournament three times and was a world rapid champion.  I don't see any of you patzer's doing that.  Plus Kasparov said all of the standard openings are viable.  This includes the London, Colle, Torre/Trompowsky complex. 

The reason people don't like the London is either they don't know how to use it, or they don't know how to fight against it.  They say it's weak because it doesn't really challenge the center and pushes that fight to the middlegame. 

I personally like this because it gets rid of the theory, which people use a crutch to hide their horrible chess skills.

I think as a generalization the London is the most drawing opening in existance.

Although I still think drawing a game of chess is about as common as getting hit by lightning.

Never the less I predict one might be hit about 3 times as often with the London so 3 times (How many times have you been hit by lightning?) as many may not mean too much unless you are a player like me who thinks drawing a game is like contracting ebola.

And even if the Opening is "drawish" so what?  People say rook endings are drawish.  But the best endgame players find ways to win in them all the time.  Just look at Carlen, or Fischer.  People say the Berlin is drawish.  Kramnik used it to beat KASPAROV of all people to become World Champion.  Just because something has a reputation of being drawish doesn't make it so. 

Hell, people think Petrosian was a drawish player.  Yet he was World Champion and beat Botvinnik for god sakes.  Not to mention the fact that Petrosian actually drew his games a lot less than people think, was one of the best tacticians of all time, and had a style that even other world champions don't completely understand.  So, being "drawish" doesn't mean a thing.  And I agree with you NM Dale, drawing doesn't happen that often.  Plus, if you have a king and pawn ending on the board, and it is a theoretical draw, doesn't mean your opponent knows how to draw with it.