Opening choices against much higher rated opponents

First of all I'd like to say that I'm fully aware that the usual advice to weaker players is not to learn openings and just focus on playing chess, so if you feel the need to share this general advice, please don't.

Players at my skill level usually has a very limited knowledge of openings. I know some lines about 8-9 moves deep, such as mainline Ruy Lopez, but in most openings I'm out of my "book" after just a few moves and in many cases I know no theory at all. I think this pattern is fairly common for players at my skill level.

When playing higher rated opponents, say 200-300 points higher or so, playing the lines that we know well may not be a good idea as our opponents will likely know every opening much better than we do. Even if I know 8-9 moves of the Ruy Lopez, they will probably know alot more than that if they're willing to play that opening in the first place (unless they don't take the game seriously, but let's assume it's a tournament game).

Playing against "book" is like playing against generations of grandmasters. Sure, the higher rated player will beat me almost every time anyway, but playing main lines where they're most likely to be booked up seems to me like giving them a couple of grand master moves for free, especially in sharp openings/variations where it may be difficult to find the moves that don't lose immediately.

If I and other players in my situation learn less common side lines to use against higher rated opponents, we may have a chance to avoid being "outbooked" and deny the higher rated opponents the "free grandmaster moves", and this may give us better chances to fight them.

I started this thread as I may get to play higher rated opponents in the near future and I'm thinking about how to prepare for this, if at all.

What do you think about opening preparation against higher rated players? Do you play your usual openings or do you play differently? How did this work out for you? Any other general thoughts on this subject?

I usually have some openings I work with best

My advice:

Slightly stronger opponent, e.g. 200pt gap: Play mainline theoretical stuff, especially as white, and make them deviate before you do. Therefore, you've at least got into the game and have got a good position to start off with.

Much stronger opponent, e.g. 500pt gap: Play very sharp openings and gambits, to at least give your opponent a chance of going wrong. Realistically, with this gulf in class, there is no chance of "genuinely" beating the opponent, so your only hope is that they mess up, so you should try to at least increase the probability of this happening.

Hello Jazzist.

Im the type of the player that always tries to play out-of-the-book, unpolular or not well known but still acceptable openings. For example, against the French (1. e4 e6) I wont play the usual d4 on the second move but I play d3 instead. Once you get your opponent "out of their openings book" then it's basically your preparation at home on your new opening against their knowledge, so it all counts on preparation! 

If you want to know more out of book but playable ideas, go and buy the Secrets of Opening Surprises Series. I haven't bought one myself but im sure it's really good (for people like me) and am counting to get it for Christmas!

Good luck :)

Reread what you just wrote... you seriously think it's better to play something you don't know, but your opponent does?

Besides, you learn from your losses. If you lose in your own opening, you learn your own opening better.

I second the advice of tendentially playing very sharp stuff against much stronger opponents. Many players play drawish stuff to simplyfy the positions against stronger opponents, but this is a suicidal strategy. In a quiet position a stronger opponent will outplay you 99% of the time. An example: see how bad the exchange french scores between amateurs, despite the fact that one can't possibly believe that white is worse after entering a simmetrical position with white to move! The lower rated player plays exd5 to earn a draw and regularly finds himself slowly losing his grip on the position. Instad you have to rise the complexity to the point that the position is difficult for both players. This way you will be able to score the occasional upset.

Against slightly stronger opponents it's unlikely thay will know a lot of theory more than you, so it makes sense to play as usual, challenging them on the ground you know better.

I have had some excess with openings such as the Kosten type english opening and the exchange ruy lopez as white.  These openings are extremely hard to lose and I know the resulting positions well.  I know everyone was saying 'play sharp stuff' or 'play for complications' but that usually exaggerates the difference in our playing levels for me.  I go for clear strategic goals and positions that make it hard for the second, stronger player to play for a win.

As black i like the open games and berlin defense, and the Queen's gambit declined.

Spot on about getting slowly outplayed in quiet positions. It's a common mistake to think that the less pieces on the board, the closer you are to a draw. Quite often the opposite is true.

Remember, 2000 vs 2500, the amateur has nothing to lose as he is expected to be crushed anyway, and all the pressure is on the GM. Play without fear and make him worry about you, not vice versa. Chess history is littered with giantkillings, just like any other sport. The ideal situation for the GM is that he has a quiet position where he can just sit back and wait for his weaker opponent to make a mistake.

Here's a famous upset where IM Jonathan Penrose throws the kitchen sink at World Champion Mikhail Tal, and it comes off: http://www.mark-weeks.com/aboutcom/pal4/zopening/blzope14.htm

It's basically easier to get an advantage when you're playing on a familiar ground, especially if this is unfamiliar ground for your opponent.

As a bonus, if the positions are sharp, it increases the odds any player will make a costly mistake.

So playing a crazy and rare gambit you've been practising for a long time against a stronger opponent may be a reasonable bet.

Another idea is to play a sharp main line where theory leads to a draw, and let your opponent deviate at his own risks...

Of course, you don't want to play anything you're not familiar with, else your weaknesses will shine...

If against a higher opponent in a tournament game i always try to play something that i think i will have seen more of then them. For example, i have a book on     1. b3, and i never think twice before playing it against a higher rated opponent. But you MUST remember, openings do not win games. middle and endgames win games. so i strongly suggest you do not focus to much on opening theory, (sure, you would want to know a few openings) but do not neglect middle+endgames. if you do it will come back to haunt you :D 

I was in an OTB tournament 3-0 and on board 2 against a 2300. I played the Caro-Kann which I thought would be drawish, instead of my usual Sicilian. I was crushed of course, and I would've been anyway, but I always regret going down without my best shot, bullets in the holster. 

+1

Unless ofcourse you like to play bizarre gambits and you play then normally aswell :D.

 That's true, but I think you should play the way you normally do. Then, you can learn from the game. If you want to draw, trade everything off, but that annoys me.

I agree with some of the comments about the openings you use agaisnt higher rated opponents..

I tend to play 1. d4 2. c4 and 3. Nc3 almost all the time and maybe 10% with the English 1.c4;  I know the openings well and make adjustments in my favorite variations as I need to.  I dont use the Catalan, Queens Indian or another openings besides the first 3 mentioned above...it helps me keep my edge and limits what I have to study and keep up with.

I learned along time ago not to pay attention to the opponent but to the board and the position at the board!  I dont look at my opponents rating if I can help it and try to solely concentrate on the board and play my best.

I use the Caro-Kann, 3 variations of a Sicilan and the Pirc for 1.e4 and it depends ipon my mood as to what opening I use..

Agaisnt 1. d4 I use the Grunfdeld, Slav and an occasional Benko Gambit, again depending on mood tho I admit iI will use the Benko if I want a win agasint a lower rated oppoenent!

I keep a full database of my games as well as Chessbase 2011 and the weekly updates so Im fresh on theroy or novelties...but I do work on my openings quite a bit,  I think as long as you are comfortable and confident in your selected repetiore, you well do fine, On the other hand if you play openings that you are not comfortable in or have trouble in, it might be worth starting to learn a new 1 or 2.

I have used the Caro Kann for years and 5 years ago added the Kalishinkov and Sveshnikov Sicilians to my repetiore  and just last yeat the Pirc and Rubenstein Sicilian..that is more than what I need and I keep practice on them constantly!

Just have confidence in what you play, understand what you are playing and I think you will do just fine!

To the original poster, I get what you're saying. And yes, it is hard to get advice on this type of thing as people will simply say "don't worry about openings". The problem is that if you "don't worry about openings" and you play people who have learned an opening well and use it against you, you are in trouble from the first move.

I'm low enough that I can't be giving anyone advice. So instead I will say what my new plan has been and so far it has been working out in the few games since I made the plan.

1) I decided as white to start doing the English opening. Why? Well for starters it is an opening proven to be solid and is common enough to have a lot of games you can explore to see how it has been played. At the same time though, it seems to be fairly unknown at the lower ratings. So when you open with it I think most opponents aren't going to know what the lines are and you will go from being behind in experience to possibly ahead in knowledge.

So why not play e4 since it is the most common opening move? Because players are spending lots of time studying sicilians, scandinavians, french, caro-kann, etc. As an inexperienced white player this is deadly for you. Black only has to know one main defense and can push the game in that direction and use his opening knowledge against you. As white, you need to know all of these defenses so you know how to adjust your play. It is simply too much to know for an inexperienced player.

D4 is better, but it is still such a favorite that you run into similar problems to e4 with the exception that there are fewer popular responses than there are for e4.

I've just started using the English opening and in the few games I've played it I felt very comfortable and didn't feel like the opponent had a bunch of memorized lines to use against me.

For black I'd say simply learn a defense you like against e4 and d4 (preferably one that white can't simply play a certain move to change it into a whole different opening). Focusing on that one single opening will give you that advantage where white needs to know a lot of responses and you need to only focus on one.

Currently my plan is Sicilian for e4 (right now I'm starting to experiment with the "French Variation" (I put that in quotes since I know some people on here feel that isn't a real name even though this site uses it)) and I'm going to focus on an Indian defense against d4. I wanted to experiment with the Gruenfeld defense against d4 but that requires white's cooperation to move into that so I can't simply focus on that one defense.

Learn a "universal" forcing opening (just one or two) for use with the white pieces and with the black pieces.

Then play these openings against everything that your opponents throw at you.  Do this for a least 1 year.

You will become "experienced" in all the thematic middle games positions that arise from your universal openings, and you will always be "booked up" in the positions and games that you get.

All you (really should) want from an opening is a level position after about 20 moves.

The above suggestions are the "easiest way" to break @1800 USCF and minimize your opening preparation at the same time.  It's still a lot of systematic work, but everyone studies the Sicilian, Nimzo, and KID.  And double e-pawn games from the white side has 500 years of theory behind it.  So bypass this gigantic theory altogether and sleep easy at night.

So save yourself lots of time, get "booked up" (more easily) and move onto studying middlegame strategy and endgame play.

Or play popular, classical openings that everyone is studying, and keep getting beat by stronger players studying the same openings etc.  Your choice entirely.

Arguably the "best opening" is one that you know well and your opponent less so.

The're no magic bullet, but the most popular oppenings with the GMs are probably not what you should be playing below Expert Level (USCF).

After you break @1800 USCF you can always re-invent your opening repetoire (your business model) to whatever whim or preference or style that suits you.

Othewise (like everyone else under Expert Level) you're just pushing wood, until your game becomes stronger.

I only know the English opening well as white, and modern / pirc as black, I don't have a clue about d4 or e4 openings, stopped playing them as 1400 players knew the openings better than me, so specialised in just 2. Imo, it doesn't matter what opening my opponent plays, I just stick to my game plan and let them blink first. Some players change their opening depending on what their opponent uses or favours, I don't.

I think this is a commonly heard but bad advice.

1)"universal systems" are less straightforward than classical central pawn openings. Harder to play, strategically complex, you will understand less of what you're doing, do a lot of middlegame mistakes (because the right plan is often subtle and hard to grasp), slow down your improvement because you are always playing the same structure. Almost every chess teacher i know of discourages the usage of such systems for less than advanced players. 

2)"Or play popular, classical openings that everyone is studying, and keep getting beat by stronger players studying the same openings etc."A common prejudice, you are never beaten because of the opening. Stronger players beat you because you are weaker, and that's all.  The fact that they might also earn a good position out of the opening is your lesser problem. And will happen also in your universal line.

3)After you break @1800 USCF you can always re-invent your opening repetoire (your business model) to whatever whim or preference or style that suits you.Yes, but the difference is that you can start playing the open sicilian at 1200 level by knowing maybe the first 5 moves and the general idea. Add a move or two every 100 rating points (hardly a lot of work,right?) and you reach 1800 with a deep enough repertoire without having ever put the slighest effort in opening preparation. Instead a player following your suggestion would suddently find himself at 1800 saying "ok, everyone around me is decently booked, knows the basic ideas behind lots of openings, i do not know anything apart my usual setup, i have never played an IQP position and never played with a space advantage. I'm totally lost with everything apart my universal system. Let's start studying 15 moves deep lines in 1 go on 7 different openings." Does it sound like a brilliant way to save work or like a self inflicted hell?