you want a dynamic, aggressive opening for white? play the king's gambit.
i probably worded that wrong..i want a solid opening as white, like the KIA was, but more aggresive, as the KIA is pretty passive with no real attacking chances excluding blunders until late
Yeah the White doesn't have to go for the "fork trick" and it's probably not the White's best, but if you are going to play the Classical as Black you should be at least aware of it.
you want a dynamic, aggressive opening for white? play the king's gambit.
i probably worded that wrong..i want a solid opening as white, like the KIA was, but more aggresive, as the KIA is pretty passive with no real attacking chances excluding blunders until late
i'd suggest the scotch then.
Fischer said playing the Ruy Lopez is like milking a cow. Once you understand that you understand the Ruy Lopez.
Actually Bronstein said that and was quoted by Larry Evans in Fischer's book. The saying contains some truth, but understanding the Ruy Lopez is a lot more complicated than that.
you want a dynamic, aggressive opening for white? play the king's gambit.
i probably worded that wrong..i want a solid opening as white, like the KIA was, but more aggresive, as the KIA is pretty passive with no real attacking chances excluding blunders until late
i'd suggest the scotch then.
thanks, ill look into that. but i've also read it's not good to change openings all the time, so maybe i'll just retreat back to my drawish KIA games.
In general the Ruy Lopez is much easier to play from the Black side. Black just has to know one line. He has several lines that give him active piece play and a position he knows much better than his opponent. A master can maintain a slight positional plus against these lines with accurate play. Right now the Moller line is having a revival due to some analysis by some masters from Arkhangel.
Thanks atos I knew Mr. Nunn's openings had a question mark there for a reason.
it's not an opening? i'm having trouble understanding how a practiced beginning sequence of moves could be called not an opening? and even if it's never used at gm levels now, for one i don't attempt/dream/try to play like a gm, also i think fischer and kasparov used it every now and then. http://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/kings-indian-attack-ok-or-not
The KIA is the opening that Lajos Portisch recommended in the book How to Open a Chess Game. As Portisch said the object of an opening is to get you into a playable middlegame. The KIA is an easy way to do this. Yes Black can equalize, but the opening is just part of the battle. If you are in a middlegame that you understand and are more familiar with then your opponent, then you have an advantage over your opponent even if the position is theoretically even. Fact is that Black can equalize in any opening, but it doesn't do him any good if he doesn't understand the position.
It is much better to be in an equal (or even slightly worse position) that you understand, than to have an advantage in a position that you don't understand. As S. J. Simon said about bridge "It is better to play a bad system well, then to play a good system poorly.
The KIA is the opening that Lajos Portisch recommended in the book How to Open a Chess Game. As Portisch said the object of an opening is to get you into a playable middlegame. The KIA is an easy way to do this. Yes Black can equalize, but the opening is just part of the battle. If you are in a middlegame that you understand and are more familiar with then your opponent, then you have an advantage over your opponent even if the position is theoretically even. Fact is that Black can equalize in any opening, but it doesn't do him any good if he doesn't understand the position.
It is much better to be in an equal (or even slightly worse position) that you understand, than to have an advantage in a position that you don't understand. As S. J. Simon said about bridge "It is better to play a bad system well, then to play a good system poorly.
well said. thank you
Hey man, thx for posting your game and your question, even though there were some errors in it. Bopgun answered a few of your questions, but apparently felt obliged to hurl some insults. Just focus on his constructive remarks. You are in a battle to get d4 and a powerful pawn center. You have some pressure on e5, but normally black has it met tactically because Nxe5 too early (before castling) runs into Qd4 and double attack on e5 and f7. You get to decide if you want to play an exchange variation (Bxc6 but only after threatened with a6) or a long strategic battle with B retreating to a4 and later c2. A lot of pices stay on the board. Usually you direct your Qsidee knight via nb1-nd2-nf1 and choice of ne3 or ng3. There are other ideas later like a4 with threat of opening a file for your rook. Also there is setups where your d4 pawn can be advanced to d5, but my impressions are releasing that tension for a little space is playable, but gives black more time for maneuvering and catching up in his development. He may need the time, if for example he plays a chigorin variation with Na5, then he wants time to bring his knight back into play. Just keep playing and analyzing your games and analyzing master games as well. Best of luck to you in your chess.
i think it's just a little overaggresive and it probably exposes some small weaknesses later on which fritz can see