Play style + Opening

Hello.

Can someone please look through my game to see what type of player I am and what opening best suits me? Thankyou. I've tried alot of openings before and none really "complements" my play style. I'm getting near 1400 and I think I need a good opening if I want to keep improving and I'm also decent at tactics.

This seems like one of those BuzzFeed quizzes. :'D What do you want out of the opening? Do you...

• Want to invest time in studying something sharp, to fight for initiative right off the bat?
• Want to get through it as soon as possible to focus on the middlegame instead?
• Prefer the center wide open for sharp tactical play?
• Prefer to slowly squeeze the life out of the enemy and win a positional war?
• Prefer to block the center and play on the wings?
• Enjoy playing isolated queen pawn games?
• Desire a hypermodern setup with a fianchetto?

For someone seeking help with choosing openings, I usually bring up Openings for Amateurs by Pete Tamburro (2014).

http://kenilworthian.blogspot.com/2014/05/review-of-pete-tamburros-openings-for.html

I believe that it is possible to see a fair portion of the beginning of Tamburro's book by going to the Mongoose Press site. Perhaps it would be appropriate to look at Discovering Chess Openings by GM Johm Emms (2006).

https://web.archive.org/web/20140627114655/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen91.pdf

Since none of the openings you have played suit your "style"  What is your style?

Maybe the opening altogether isn't to your taste and you should play the simplest variations to get a playable middlegame.

I don't think thats how it works not even for great competent players that really need to get their reportoire together...

they don't 'pick' an opening based upon the reputation of the opening- instead,they play openings noticing what they feel like they understand.

the point is to have a plan- a feel of what kinds of of strengths and weaknesses are inherent in the typical middlegame.   

---

so the point is to play many different openings, play the opening by theory, and keep track of what openings go better than others....

so "live" (chess.com's version of correspondance chess) chess should be the place to start.  join a few groups- get in alot of matches and try out different openings. use the opening explorer to make sure you playing the opening by the book.  

-----

alternately,  a long while ago I played a chess computer (relatively weak level) many different openings.  I played 95 openings. and afterwards I found some openings I liked and a few I hated.  

Sorry I wasn't specific enough. I often enjoy e4 openings but dislike d4 openings because d4 it's too "boring" for me. I want to get to the midgame relativly quickly, I usually don't mind opponent having space advantage on me, and I like the idea of hyper mordern openings, however too many of them includes fianchetto which is easily countered by the corner pawn attack.

This is what I'm trying now. Previously I've tried Italian Game, Ruy Lopez, Queen's Gambit, Engish Opening, Reti System, King's Indian Attack, Scotch Game and none of them yet are appealing to me

I like to think myself as an "aggresive positional" player, I often sacrifice to open the opponent's king position however I worry alot about isolated pawns, bishop pairs, pawn chains etc. I also used a few tactics in my games so I want experienced players to tell me what style I am.

No.

Sorry I forgot to note that I'm happy with my black openings (caro-kann and semi slav)

ChopinKnight wrote:

thegreat_patzer wrote:

I don't think thats how it works not even for great competent players that really need to get their reportoire together...

they don't 'pick' an opening based upon the reputation of the opening- instead,they play openings noticing what they feel like they understand.

the point is to have a plan- a feel of what kinds of of strengths and weaknesses are inherent in the typical middlegame.   

---

so the point is to play many different openings, play the opening by theory, and keep track of what openings go better than others....

so "live" (chess.com's version of correspondance chess) chess should be the place to start.  join a few groups- get in alot of matches and try out different openings. use the opening explorer to make sure you playing the opening by the book.  

-----

alternately,  a long while ago I played a chess computer (relatively weak level) many different openings.  I played 95 openings. and afterwards I found some openings I liked and a few I hated.  

This is what I'm trying now. Previously I've tried Italian Game, Ruy Lopez, Queen's Gambit, Engish Opening, Reti System, King's Indian Attack, Scotch Game and none of them yet are appealing to me

You should try the transvestite opening

lol

I knew the word agressive was going to be used.  Let me be honest with you, you have no style.  Thats not meant to be negative, its just where your game is at.  I looked at some of your games and typical of low rated players:

You drop pieces

You miss simple tactics

You dont formulate a middlegame plan

You dont follow Opening Principles

How to improve?

Study tactics...tactics...tactics.

Follow opening principles.  Find 2 openings with white and black that youre comfortable playing.  Dont get caught up in "style". 

All the things you worry about comes from not knowing the openings you play, not knowing the middlegame, and not understanding pawn structures.  Get Andy Soltis's book on pawn structures.  

I looked through a few of your games and noticed these things: 

• You trade pieces without considering other options
• Your game is full of one move threats which weaken your position
• The moves you play are usually the most obvious moves

I observed the game http://www.chess.com/livechess/game?id=1401077929 and immediately noticed you missed that the white queen is trapped after 9...Qc7 and 10...O-O or the reverse order. This same theme came about on move 13...Qc7 and after the forced line 14. Nxd7 Qc1+ 15. Ke2 Qxh1 white gets the exchange back but remains down a pawn. (One may note that this was posted right after the game finished. I indeed prepared this analysis during the game itself and only clicked post after the live game concluded.)

In conclusion, rather than trying to pick an opening that fits your style, I would take more time on basic tactical themes and only then pick an opening. 

ChopinKnight wrote:

NachtWulf wrote:

This seems like one of those BuzzFeed quizzes. :'D What do you want out of the opening? Do you...

Want to invest time in studying something sharp, to fight for initiative right off the bat? Want to get through it as soon as possible to focus on the middlegame instead? Prefer the center wide open for sharp tactical play? Prefer to slowly squeeze the life out of the enemy and win a positional war? Prefer to block the center and play on the wings? Enjoy playing isolated queen pawn games? Desire a hypermodern setup with a fianchetto?

Sorry I wasn't specific enough. I often enjoy e4 openings but dislike d4 openings because d4 it's too "boring" for me. I want to get to the midgame relativly quickly, I usually don't mind opponent having space advantage on me, and I like the idea of hyper mordern openings, however too many of them includes fianchetto which is easily countered by the corner pawn attack.

Uhm...you have just completely contradicted yourself. As an old book from the mid 90s explains, Winning With The Hypermodern, a Hypermodern opening, by definition, involves:

1) Neither central pawn being advanced more than 1 square early on

2) The fiachettoing of AT LEAST one bishop

3) Allowing your opponent to occupy the center on the basis that you plan to then chip away and prove he is over extended.

still op your search isn't a bad thing!

you have to play some opening.  some people here feel the Need to memorize an exact reportoire.  ok- its not exactly a Productive use of time, but it makes them feel good. and you shouldn't really need THAT much time to figure out a "playable" reportoire. 

I myself take a middle road.  After a lot of looking I play a consistant game- and I have a little reportiore memorized 3 deep in some spots- and in a few french lines - i know what I'm going to do for next 5 moves...

I DON'T spend alot of time staring at theory- or trying to memorize a deeper reportoire- but I know how I want my minor peices developed- and a know a few traps; (natural moves that lose to tactics)...

but the POINT is- I didn't ask for anybodies opinion.  oddly enough I actually picked my favorite opening because I kept on losing to it. for a awhile I was beaten game after game in the french-- so as black I learned the french- and now I play d4 as white so I NEVER play  white against the french.

I figure if I kept on getting beaten by a certain opening it must be pretty good at beating up patzers....

----

@diakona.  while I like your posts- I only agree to it , to a certain extent.  in chess you often have the choice between being bold, and hanging back and ceding some space and intiative.

even with patzer skills, there's still a certain  flexibility in how you develop.  IMHO.

as I wrote my rant.  thriller made a solid point.

you say you like hypermodern openings but NOT fianchettos.

what the heck? do you not intend to develop your bishop at all?  if you think you can win by NOT developing peices- this is poor strategy indeed.

fianchettos are PART Of hypermodern openings because you MUST try to control the center.  peices have more power in the center.  you don't need to occupy the center, but you must "try to control" it. 

Good catch thriller.

If we all agreed on everything life would be boring.  What part(s) of my post do you not agree with?  I am always open to learning, understanding, and improving.  

It's a shame this books doesn't cover some major solid openings such as the Slav/Semi-Slav...