hmm.. this thread has gone from being about whether the OP should play the English to the discussion about when a player should start to learn opening theory
Should beginners play the English?
Sort:
Mar 22, 2013
0
#23
I agree the English should be put off for now, but with one caveat.
At some point, someone is going to play the English against you. It wouldn't hurt to at least know some of the ideas behind the opening. Not that you should play it as White, just have an idea of what you want to do when you play against it as Black.
damn i have forgoten the line, didnt someone show an interesting refutation against the halloween gambit were black gave back the knight for a wining position?
Sure. Play the English. What could possibly go wrong!
if someone plays the english against you 1.Nf6 is an extremely flexible move that can easily go into the Kings indian defense if that is an opening you like it can also go into various other openings
Mar 22, 2013
0
#27
I have a good feel for playing against the English. In fact I am delighted when it is played, probably because if I'm playing someone of a similar standard I'm likely more familiar than they are.
I'm gonna pick up Sicilian against 1.e4 instead of e5, where I have previously enjoyed playing the Petroff.
Pfren, I have an honest question for you: If I try to follow your advice and play 1. d4 and my opponent chooses to play the KID what do you expect the non-candidate master to do? resign immediately because the KID is not a classical opening?
I think I get what you mean, but the way you phrased it is actually impossible to achieve in practice because one's opponent does not always respond classically.
I suggest that you not play the English, as it is more of a positional opening and might not give you enough chances to practice tactics. I say you should play 1e4. Yes, the resulting positions can get crazy sometimes and you have to face the Sicilian quite a lot (find a good anti-Sicilian for that), but it allows you to practice tactics every game.
1d4 is good too but as some have pointed out here, it can lead to non-classical positions like KID, QID, Grunfeld, etc. and some of those can be ultra-sharp. Against 1e4, about the only hypermodern defense that people play is Pirc/Modern and that is not used very often. (Sicilian Dragon also looks a bit hypermodern, but you can avoid it with an anti-Sicilian).
Mar 22, 2013
0
#30
Just came in here to say that the Halloween Gambit is utterly terrifying and a much better choice for a new (OK, newish) player than the English. :)
If you are good at playing The Sicilian as black then you may be good at the English. Heck, you have already gained a tempo! Have at it!
yeah but with the english you dont necessarily get sicilian structures.
Mar 22, 2013
0
#33
No!! Play sharp openings! And study tactical openings and tactics. And endgame tactics!
If you are going to play the english opening you need to know it can change too queens pawns openings, fx queens gambit, slav defense or the Reti opening!
Mar 22, 2013
0
#34
TetsuoShima wrote:
yeah but with the english you dont necessarily get sicilian structures.
Actually, you often do.
Btw, the English is the bane of my chess existance, because to beat someone who knows what they're doing with that opening requires actually playing well and understanding a lot of chess things - cheapos rarely suffice.
GargleBlaster wrote:
TetsuoShima wrote:
yeah but with the english you dont necessarily get sicilian structures.
Actually, you often do.
Btw, the English is the bane of my chess existance, because to beat someone who knows what they're doing with that opening requires actually playing well and understanding a lot of chess things - cheapos rarely suffice.
but if someone has a lot of knowledge chesswise he probably would be tough to beat in every opening.
Mar 22, 2013
0
#36
GargleBlaster wrote:
TetsuoShima wrote:
yeah but with the english you dont necessarily get sicilian structures.
Actually, you often do.
Btw, the English is the bane of my chess existance, because to beat someone who knows what they're doing with that opening requires actually playing well and understanding a lot of chess things - cheapos rarely suffice.
Nice to see a Hitchhikers guide fan :D
Mar 22, 2013
0
#37
TetsuoShima wrote:
but if someone has a lot of knowledge chesswise he probably would be tough to beat in every opening.
Yes, but an opening that minimizes weird swindling opportunities is ideal for the better player when facing a coffehouse opponent. Also, the English is a great way to rope-a-dope an overaggressive adversary.
Oh, and thanks rob, and nice avatar. :)
robmccarthy wrote:
GargleBlaster wrote:
TetsuoShima wrote:
yeah but with the english you dont necessarily get sicilian structures.
Actually, you often do.
Btw, the English is the bane of my chess existance, because to beat someone who knows what they're doing with that opening requires actually playing well and understanding a lot of chess things - cheapos rarely suffice.
Nice to see a Hitchhikers guide fan :D
im also a fan but i didnt remember the name or the picture lol
Play whatever you like, it's your right to do so.
Just don't complain if you fail to make any progess regarding the quality of your play after some time...
I have to agree with IM pfren, from experience. I played the English for years as a novice tournament player, believing that I would catch my opponents 'out of book'. As a result my growth as a chessplayer stagnated during this time, my tactics remained shoddy and my positional understanding never quite arrived. True, I did develop a certain mediocre proficiency in the opening, and won a few games...but that was my opponent's fault more than mine most of the time. Eventually to my credit I got sick of the English, and began playing 1.e4 of necessity...and my losses are more instructive to me in this way then they ever were with 1.c4 (which I currently hold the opinion that it gives the second player easier equality than 1.e4 does).