Polish opening help

So I just started looking into the polish opening, if you know a thing or two about the ideas, traps, or basic theory please share.

hit the search button in the openings thread and look up Sokolsky. there are plenty of threads to give information.

oh yea, thanks

I do play the Polish opening. there are many different ways that black can respond. the most common that I see is 1.b4,e5 2.Bb2,Bxb4 3.Bxe5, Nf6 and play goes on from there.

whites slightly better after 1.e4 so I dont think it matters all that much at this point in the game, but it does seem black might be better, so I made some variations to test that.

To continue after Nf6 white should usually go 2. Bb2, 2. a3, or 2. Nf3 in their own respective variations, also d4 and c4 are options but I wouldnt vouch for them as much. my personal favorite so far is Nf3 and black can go with a variety of varying paths.

2... e5: Now white can exchange with 3.Nxe5 Bxb4 and solidfy their position with 4. e3 or Bb2 and honestly I dont see much of an advantage for either side. white managed to trade off a pretty useless pawn for blacks e pawn and will continue to fianchetto and maintain a presence in the center. often leads to a more open aggressive game.

2... d5: In this variation black will most likely attemp to take advantage of whites weak center, try to go Nbd7 and e5 if possible. white here is gonna try to stop that with e3, d4 and it also seems quite eqaul. this tends to be a more closed positional game.

2... Na6: while you can play Nc6 I couldnt really find much advantage with it after b5 or a6 so this seems to be a bit better to actually challange b4, Im not sure what stockfish would say but it does stop any shenanigans with the B pawn. the goal of this attack is to make the B pawn useless after something like 3. b5 Nc5 or 3. a3/c3 c5. this does lead to more open but less aggressive position.

Their are more passive moves like b6, c6, d6, e6, and g6 or some somewhat refutable, and aggressive options like Nc6 or Nd5 but Imma skip those because theirs not too much special about them and their just arguably not as good.

Get Hansen's book on 1.b4 from late 2021.

Yea I’ll check it out. Have you specifically read it, and if so how’s it organized. I personally like algebraic notations and straight forward explanations.

I mean why not the polish opening. It’s fun to mix up your repertoire every once and awhile, and any opponent besides stockfish isn’t going to get an advantage because of it, so if anything I’ll get style points for them not knowing the lines and goals.

I do own it, but I also own Lapshun and Costello's book from 2008 and the theoretical work from 2009.

I am not going to say it was the best ever written book. There are some typographical errors on one page, I want to say page 54, where all the lines are there, but like, one line that cuts off at the top of the page continues half way down the page (NOT via correct usage of parenthesis). It takes time to figure it out.

Outside of that major error, the book itself is ok, but it won't have 1200 level explanations. If you are looking for it to be similar to Everyman's First Steps or Starting Out series, you will be very saddened. You will actually have to put in the hard work and actually take your time to figure out and understand the patterns, not just zip through lines and expecting to memorize and suddenly think your score goes up.

The following game was played over the board last night. Time control was game in 85 minutes with a 5 second increment. I was in pretty bad time trouble when it got to Q, R, and N with me a pawn up. Play gets sloppy at that point, but I at least held on.

there are two key ideas to understand when playing the Polish as white. 1) the majority of the time the opening does not lead to an opening advantage for white. it generally leads to equal positions. there is nothing wrong with that. there are many openings Black overcome the opening advantage to secure an equal position. and 2) the middle game can be very transpositional to other middle games generally found in other openings. But they are slightly different in peice placements or because the b pawn has already been advanced. some theory of other openings is needed to know which waters you are swimming in. the plus side of this is that black generally has to " think for themselves" because the positions though they may be familiar do not necessarily match up to what they are used to seeing.

The openings that he is referring to, with of course a few rare exceptions, are predominantly English Opening, King's Indian Defense, QGD and Slav positions, Reverse London positions, and Reverse French positions.

The exchange variation, 1.b4 e5 2.Bb2 Bxb4 3.Bxe5 Nf6, is a line in and of itself and has its own theory unlike any other opening.

true, you could also add Queens Indian types and kings Gambit.

I mean I really only read FCO by GM Paul van der Sterren so I mean Im not sure if theres like a... reading level for these kinda things. Also just hit *1200*

Yeah, forgot about QID, pretty common.

What lines do you get KG positions? That crappy Gambit against 2...f6? After 1.b4 e5 2.Bb2 f6, I always play the sane 3.b5. The Gambit line, 3.e4 Bxb4 4.Bc4 Ne7, is garbage. Both 5.f4 and 5.Qh5 are a farce. Might work in bullet, but in anything legitimate, like Over the Board or Correspondence, it's trash.

Before reading opening books or studying openings, you need to get fundamentals down. You should read the following 2 books first before doing any more opening study:

1) Silman's Complete Endgame Course (Jeremy Silman)

2) The Inner Game of Chess (Andrew Soltis)

Then a third, if you can find a used copy because it is long out of print is Bishop : Knight: The Verdict by Steve Mayer. The first two though are far more critical.

I was just about to ask about Silman's Complete Endgame Course because I have heard good things about that every which way so Imma probably go with that as my next book of choice.

I havent heard of The Inner Game of Chess but It looks to be right down my alley, I'll have to check that out at some point.

Bishop v Knight is on internet archive, so if its out of print I see I might as well

I would not necessarily refer to the Tartakower gambit as trash. but it does have some issues that need to be addressed. but I feel that the majority of gambits deal with issues that need to be addressed. the word gambit does mean a gamble.