What are some good openings do you recommend to play for a 500 rated player like me?

Sort:
buytuu

bongcloud

SamuelAjedrez95
Ethan_Brollier wrote:

Not for a 500. The Poisoned Pawn Winawer plans are much simpler for White, whereas the Mainline Najdorf plans are much less clear.

I don't see how it's simpler. The plans are just different. In the Winawer Poisoned Pawn you are either defending a pawn up position or trying to split open the kingside.

Main Line Najdorf you are trying to split open the kingside or gambit a pawn for attack.

I would actually compare the Main Line Najdorf very strongly to the Poisoned Pawn Winawer as they are similar in style.

SamuelAjedrez95
LordVandheer wrote:

So you folk are suggesting that I should check out Fischer Sozin if I ever switch into Open Sicillian from Morra?

Definitely. The Fischer-Sozin Attack is one of the most aggressive and tactical variations of the Najdorf alongside the Main Line (Bg5). It's considered slightly dubious but so slight that it would never be noticeable at our level.

It makes a lot of sense with the Morra as well since the pressure of the bishop along the diagonal can lead to similar tactics like sacrifices on d5 or e6.

The major differences are that white isn't down a pawn and also the knight is on d4. It targets e6 so sacrifices on that square come even stronger and also it no longer blocks the f pawn so f4-f5 becomes an idea.

NumerousBadgers
SamuelAjedrez95 wrote:
Ethan_Brollier wrote:

Not for a 500. The Poisoned Pawn Winawer plans are much simpler for White, whereas the Mainline Najdorf plans are much less clear.

I don't see how it's simpler. The plans are just different. In the Winawer Poisoned Pawn you are either defending a pawn up position or trying to split open the kingside.

Main Line Najdorf you are trying to split open the kingside or gambit a pawn for attack.

I would actually compare the Main Line Najdorf very strongly to the Poisoned Pawn Winawer as they are similar in style.

They’re similar, although the Poisoned Pawn Winawer is slightly better for beginners.

SamuelAjedrez95
NumerousBadgers wrote:

They’re similar, although the Poisoned Pawn Winawer is slightly better for beginners.

Not really. The ideas are just different. It's not like one set of ideas is better for beginners than the other. They both take some understanding.

In the Winawer, white is playing for a kingside attack and has ideas like Ng5, h4.

In tha Main Line Najdorf, white is playing for a kingside attack with pressure on e6. They have ideas like h4, Rg1, fxe6.

LordVandheer
SamuelAjedrez95 wrote:
LordVandheer wrote:

So you folk are suggesting that I should check out Fischer Sozin if I ever switch into Open Sicillian from Morra?

Definitely. The Fischer-Sozin Attack is one of the most aggressive and tactical variations of the Najdorf alongside the Main Line (Bg5). It's considered slightly dubious but so slight that it would never be noticeable at our level.

It makes a lot of sense with the Morra as well since the pressure of the bishop along the diagonal can lead to similar tactics like sacrifices on d5 or e6.

The major differences are that white isn't down a pawn and also the knight is on d4. It targets e6 so sacrifices on that square come even stronger and also it no longer blocks the f pawn so f4-f5 becomes an idea.

Say no more.

Attacking chess ever, attacking chess forever.

Ethan_Brollier
SamuelAjedrez95 wrote:
NumerousBadgers wrote:

They’re similar, although the Poisoned Pawn Winawer is slightly better for beginners.

Not really. The ideas are just different. It's not like one set of ideas is better for beginners than the other. They both take some understanding.

In the Winawer, white is playing for a kingside attack and has ideas like Ng5, h4.

In tha Main Line Najdorf, white is playing for a kingside attack with pressure on e6. They have ideas like h4, Rg1, fxe6.

I don't know if I agree. Black is knocking on death's door in the Winawer, which is why White scores so well in it. In the Najdorf, Black is much safer while still having all the queenside counterplay of the Winawer, which is why Black scores so well in it.

Ethan_Brollier
NumerousBadgers wrote:
Ethan_Brollier wrote:
NumerousBadgers wrote:
SamuelAjedrez95 wrote:

London system is actually very bad for beginner chess development. It's easy but quite dry and unambitious. It can teach bad habits as you are only learning to play on autopilot and not challenge the opponent in the opening.

Ruy Lopez, Queen's Gambit, Italian (particularly some gambit lines) or Scotch are all way better and more fun.

I agree with the fact that it’s dry, but it helps teach good principles, and can be a good base off of which you can learn other openings (for instance, the Trompowsky). I think the Italian Game is pretty good for beginners, and the Queen’s Gambit is also great. I do think the best beginner repertoire would be the Caro Kann, Italian, Pirc, Queen’s Gambit, London, and King’s Indian Attack. The Owen’s Defense, Trompowsky, and a Scandinavian are better for more advanced beginners.

The issue with that repertoire is that aside from the Queen's Gambit, all of those are very complex positional, waiting, defensive openings, and beginners usually are much more suited for attacking, not defending. I'd argue that that's actually a fantastic repertoire for 1100-1400 players, (advanced beginners) and Owens/Trompowsky/Scandi is a better repertoire below 1100 (beginners).

You do make a very excellent point - I teach chess classes, and for the most part, my students love the Owens/Trompowsky/Scandi as their main repertoire, with some other stuff on the side, like the London, KIA, and Queen’s Gambit.

What rating do you teach for?
I'm not surprised. Owen's and Trompowsky are GothamChess certified unfortunately, and the Scandinavian is a hallmark of a beginner.

NumerousBadgers
Ethan_Brollier wrote:
NumerousBadgers wrote:
Ethan_Brollier wrote:
NumerousBadgers wrote:
SamuelAjedrez95 wrote:

London system is actually very bad for beginner chess development. It's easy but quite dry and unambitious. It can teach bad habits as you are only learning to play on autopilot and not challenge the opponent in the opening.

Ruy Lopez, Queen's Gambit, Italian (particularly some gambit lines) or Scotch are all way better and more fun.

I agree with the fact that it’s dry, but it helps teach good principles, and can be a good base off of which you can learn other openings (for instance, the Trompowsky). I think the Italian Game is pretty good for beginners, and the Queen’s Gambit is also great. I do think the best beginner repertoire would be the Caro Kann, Italian, Pirc, Queen’s Gambit, London, and King’s Indian Attack. The Owen’s Defense, Trompowsky, and a Scandinavian are better for more advanced beginners.

The issue with that repertoire is that aside from the Queen's Gambit, all of those are very complex positional, waiting, defensive openings, and beginners usually are much more suited for attacking, not defending. I'd argue that that's actually a fantastic repertoire for 1100-1400 players, (advanced beginners) and Owens/Trompowsky/Scandi is a better repertoire below 1100 (beginners).

You do make a very excellent point - I teach chess classes, and for the most part, my students love the Owens/Trompowsky/Scandi as their main repertoire, with some other stuff on the side, like the London, KIA, and Queen’s Gambit.

What rating do you teach for?

A pretty wide range. My best students are 13-1400, and my less highly rated ones are 300-900.

Ethan_Brollier
NumerousBadgers wrote:
Ethan_Brollier wrote:
NumerousBadgers wrote:
Ethan_Brollier wrote:
NumerousBadgers wrote:
SamuelAjedrez95 wrote:

London system is actually very bad for beginner chess development. It's easy but quite dry and unambitious. It can teach bad habits as you are only learning to play on autopilot and not challenge the opponent in the opening.

Ruy Lopez, Queen's Gambit, Italian (particularly some gambit lines) or Scotch are all way better and more fun.

I agree with the fact that it’s dry, but it helps teach good principles, and can be a good base off of which you can learn other openings (for instance, the Trompowsky). I think the Italian Game is pretty good for beginners, and the Queen’s Gambit is also great. I do think the best beginner repertoire would be the Caro Kann, Italian, Pirc, Queen’s Gambit, London, and King’s Indian Attack. The Owen’s Defense, Trompowsky, and a Scandinavian are better for more advanced beginners.

The issue with that repertoire is that aside from the Queen's Gambit, all of those are very complex positional, waiting, defensive openings, and beginners usually are much more suited for attacking, not defending. I'd argue that that's actually a fantastic repertoire for 1100-1400 players, (advanced beginners) and Owens/Trompowsky/Scandi is a better repertoire below 1100 (beginners).

You do make a very excellent point - I teach chess classes, and for the most part, my students love the Owens/Trompowsky/Scandi as their main repertoire, with some other stuff on the side, like the London, KIA, and Queen’s Gambit.

What rating do you teach for?

A pretty wide range. My best students are 13-1400, and my less highly rated ones are 300-900.

Blitz or Rapid? Ahhh, unfortunate. I'm 1600, so I'm pretty far out of that range.

SamuelAjedrez95
Ethan_Brollier wrote:

I don't know if I agree. Black is knocking on death's door in the Winawer, which is why White scores so well in it. In the Najdorf, Black is much safer while still having all the queenside counterplay of the Winawer, which is why Black scores so well in it.

White also scores very well in the Main Line Najdorf. It's a good game for both players either way as it's a sound opening.

It scores far better than the Canal Attack which is perfectly fine for black.

The Main Line is far more aggressive and gives white way better attacking chances with the pawnstorm and pieces mounted on the kingside. The Canal Attack is more positional and doesn't have the same bite. It's just trading off pieces for the purpose of simplifying the game.

RedFastMath

I would play e5 more at under 1000 1000-1400 gambits 1400+ more positional stuff

RedFastMath

d4

LordVandheer

I respect the mans grind and success, but can't stand his openings man.

Traxler? Accepting Fried Liver is more sound than Traxler. Hope chess. There are reasonable gambits and then there is hope chess. Traxler falls into that.

Caro Kann. Vienna. London. Oh my god. At least we have Panov attack on Caro. Try to make London less boring though. Most I can do is Nf6-c5-Qb6. I will admit its my incompetence to not turn London into mayhem, if such a thing is possible.

I asked a fellow Caro player that is barely 1000 on correspondence, why he was playing Caro. He told me that it contests the center. ???? Couldn't you like, put a pawn on e5 if you wanted that? I think chess players should follow the history of openings, and evolve like the game did.

Maybe its just his openings are not suited to my style at all and harder for me to counter so it irritates me. It could be that. Who knows.

Ethan_Brollier
SamuelAjedrez95 wrote:
Ethan_Brollier wrote:

I don't know if I agree. Black is knocking on death's door in the Winawer, which is why White scores so well in it. In the Najdorf, Black is much safer while still having all the queenside counterplay of the Winawer, which is why Black scores so well in it.

White also scores very well in the Main Line Najdorf. It's a good game for both players either way as it's a sound opening.

It at least scores better than the Canal Attack.

In the line you gave as an example, White scores a measly 38.5 points after 13... 0-0, to be fair it is the third most common move, but after Black's king safety is taken care of, Black's queenside counterplay should prove deadly. Even in the most common variation of the line you gave, after 13... Bxg5+ 14. Kb1, 14... 0-0 and White scores exactly 50/50. This one is justified, as the most common move (14... Ne5) is a massive blunder, losing a pawn and opening Black's king to attack immediately.

True. I recommend the Canal Attack because it's very simple.

SamuelAjedrez95
Ethan_Brollier wrote:

It's not that simple. White has massive attacking opportunities and scores very well with different moves like Rg1, h4 etc.

Black has counterattacking chances as well but, as mentioned, it's a sound opening which is a game for both sides, like any sound opening. The way you talk about is as if it's a refuted opening for white and that black's win is just easy. Not true. It's a brilliant attacking line for white.

The Najdorf is also a strong defence by black. At this point we're not even talking about what's best for beginners but which defence is better.

The Canal Attack doesn't give white any better attacking or winning chances than the Main Line.

Avoiding the Najdorf or Dragon is not giving yourself any better opportunities. These are defences against white's strongest opening against the Sicilian, the Open Sicilian.

Ethan_Brollier
SamuelAjedrez95 wrote:
Ethan_Brollier wrote:

It's not that simple. White has massive attacking opportunities and scores very well with different moves like Rg1, h4 etc.
++ True

Black has counterattacking chances as well but, as mentioned, it's a sound opening which is a game for both sides, like any sound opening. The way you talk about is as if it's a refuted opening for white and that black's win is just easy. Not true. It's a brilliant attacking line for white.
++ Not how I intended for it to sound, I know White's attack is very strong, but even more so in the Winawer is the point I'm trying to make.

The Najdorf is also a strong defence by black. At this point we're not even talking about what's best for beginners but which defence is better.
++ Exactly, but that's why I'm more talking simple plans. I'd totally tell a beginner to attack the Winawer, because I think they'd have a decent chance of doing well, but they'd learn, and then after a while of learning, then I'd tell them to attack the Najdorf, a stronger defense for Black.

The Canal Attack doesn't give white any better attacking or winning chances than the Main Line. 
++ I know. I'm recommending it to avoid 'teh theory' *dramatic gasp* but unironically for a 500, the Canal has THE simplest plans of essentially and Sicilian and will build well if OP ever learns the Ruy Lopez.

Ethan_Brollier

@SamuelAjedrez95, note that I'm not trying to give the best variations all the time, I'm trying to give the lines which will teach long-term ideas. Kramnik transfers to Tarrasch, Winawer transfers to Najdorf, Canal transfers to Ruy Lopez, et cetera. This is a "teaching" repertoire more so than a "winning" repertoire, though I tried to pick White's best lines in each of these as well because winning is fun.

SamuelAjedrez95

@LordVandheer

It's actually true. The Traxler is worse than accepting the Fried Liver. It's voluntarily playing this position.

And then what?

The reason they play the Caro Kann is probably because they were told to be Levy. This is the Gothamchess agenda: Caro Kann, London, Vienna every game.

LordVandheer
SamuelAjedrez95 wrote:

@LordVandheer

It's actually true. The Traxler is worse than accepting the Fried Liver. It's voluntarily playing this position.

And then what?

The reason they play the Caro Kann is probably because they were told to be Levy. This is the Gothamchess agenda: Caro Kann, London, Vienna every game.

It is. Entire idea of Traxler lies upon white being greedy. Bxf7+ and two natural retreating moves, and the counterattack is murdered cold.

Polerio defense is practically equal.

In Ulvestad, anything aside from Bf1 immediately equalizes for black. White has to find an extremely unintuitive retreating move to keep an advantage.

In Fritz, you have a venomous trap that may end with a smothered mate. Or whites misplays will simply leave him in a worse position. White has to find c3 to keep advantage.

I am not joking about this, you can open Lichess cloud analysis if you don't believe me, but apparently even this nonsense is more sound than Traxler.

Its bad when Fried Liver and Lolli Attack are less dangerous.