What do you Think that the "Drawiest" Openings are?

Sort:
CRHer700

I am interested in what the best openings for drawing someone for both Black and White at slow time controls (e.g. daily).

I am up against several much higher rated people in my daily games, and was wondering what the very safest openings are to minimize my losses.

I am not used to playing like this, but I don't want to be very risky with a strong opponent.

darkunorthodox88

petroff, berlin endgame, queens indian (bb7 variations not ba6) exchange french, exchange slav, lasker variation of the queens gambit declined.

CRHer700
darkunorthodox88 wrote:

petroff, berlin endgame, queens indian (bb7 variations not ba6) exchange french, exchange slav, lasker variation of the queens gambit declined.

Thank you for the information. I shall put it to good use. 👍

ThrillerFan
darkunorthodox88 wrote:

petroff, berlin endgame, queens indian (bb7 variations not ba6) exchange french, exchange slav, lasker variation of the queens gambit declined.

Petroff isn't drawish at all, especially the 5.Nc3 lines. Lasker QGD can also be avoided, when I did play the QGD from the White side, I preferred the lines where White takes on f6 if White plays ...h6.

SymphonicKnight

5.Nc3 is still drawish, with 44% draws (as, technically,the Berlin) at the lower levels of master, but which is really quite high at the highest levels (for comparison the Sicilian Dragon perhaps 28%, and the King's Indian Defense perhaps 33%) are all probably doubled at that level.

darkunorthodox88
SymphonicKnight wrote:

5.Nc3 is still drawish, with 44% draws (as, technically,the Berlin) at the lower levels of master, but which is really quite high at the highest levels (for comparison the Sicilian Dragon perhaps 28%, and the King's Indian Defense perhaps 33%) are all probably doubled at that level.

petroff is literally a draw weapon. its entire aim is to dry the position up neutralizing the first move advantage as fast as possible (compared to the spanish torture that is nc6) and was the way to play for a draw until the berlin endgame overtook it for that purpose. "
nc3 is just one of white's way to spice things up the most . But that would be like saying the french exchange is not drawish because opposite side castling is possible in some variations.

ThrillerFan
darkunorthodox88 wrote:
SymphonicKnight wrote:

5.Nc3 is still drawish, with 44% draws (as, technically,the Berlin) at the lower levels of master, but which is really quite high at the highest levels (for comparison the Sicilian Dragon perhaps 28%, and the King's Indian Defense perhaps 33%) are all probably doubled at that level.

petroff is literally a draw weapon. its entire aim is to dry the position up neutralizing the first move advantage as fast as possible (compared to the spanish torture that is nc6) and was the way to play for a draw until the berlin endgame overtook it for that purpose. "
nc3 is just one of white's way to spice things up the most . But that would be like saying the french exchange is not drawish because opposite side castling is possible in some variations.

I play the Petroff to win, and if they play the line that transposes to the exchange french, I play that to win.

As a former French player, I have scored over 70% with Black in the Exchange French.

Compadre_J

No one plays the Petroff to win.

The only person playing for win is White.

White wins or draws that’s about it.

I smile every time I see the Petroff because I know in my heart it’s going to be easy game with White pieces.

Nerwal

The Ragozin 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 Bb4 5. Bg5 h6 6. Bxf6 Qxf6. This is super dry especially for Black. Similarly the Bogo-Indian 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 Bb4+ 4. Bd2 Bxd2+, - especially the lines with d5.

Many lines of the Grünfeld as they have been explored to the end so they became drawish.

1. c4 c5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nc3 Nc6 4. d4 cxd4 5. Nxd4 e6 6. Ndb5 d5 7. Bf4 e5 8. cxd5 exf4 9. dxc6 bxc6 10. Qxd8+ Kxd8 (1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 c5 4. Nc3 Nc6 5. Bf4 cxd4 6. Nxd4 Nf6 7. Ndb5 leads to the same thing). Despite the unbalance, this endgame has been considered drawn for decades, see Korchnoi's book.

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Rg1 e5 7. Nb3 Be6 8. g4 d5 9. exd5 Nxd5 10. Nxd5 Qxd5 11. Qxd5 Bxd5 12. Be3 Nc6 13. 0-0-0 0-0-0 14. Bb6 is quite a boring drawish endgame, sad from a Najdorf.

darkunorthodox88
ThrillerFan wrote:
darkunorthodox88 wrote:
SymphonicKnight wrote:

5.Nc3 is still drawish, with 44% draws (as, technically,the Berlin) at the lower levels of master, but which is really quite high at the highest levels (for comparison the Sicilian Dragon perhaps 28%, and the King's Indian Defense perhaps 33%) are all probably doubled at that level.

petroff is literally a draw weapon. its entire aim is to dry the position up neutralizing the first move advantage as fast as possible (compared to the spanish torture that is nc6) and was the way to play for a draw until the berlin endgame overtook it for that purpose. "
nc3 is just one of white's way to spice things up the most . But that would be like saying the french exchange is not drawish because opposite side castling is possible in some variations.

I play the Petroff to win, and if they play the line that transposes to the exchange french, I play that to win.

As a former French player, I have scored over 70% with Black in the Exchange French.

thats cuz you still playing in the pony section

ThrillerFan
Compadre_J wrote:

No one plays the Petroff to win.

The only person playing for win is White.

White wins or draws that’s about it.

I smile every time I see the Petroff because I know in my heart it’s going to be easy game with White pieces.

I repeat! I play the Petroff to WIN! The fact that White blunders on move 9 is not my problem. And this ain't anything pony section. This is the top section of the tournament and my opponent had 1.5/2 going into this round.

Play the Petroff to WIN!

Compadre_J
ThrillerFan wrote:

I repeat! I play the Petroff to WIN!

Yeah, We see the type of WIN’s your playing for.

You should be ashamed of yourself for beating up on 1,200 Elo rated players.

ThrillerFan
Compadre_J wrote:
ThrillerFan wrote:

I repeat! I play the Petroff to WIN!

Yeah, We see the type of WIN’s your playing for.

You should be ashamed of yourself for beating up on 1,200 Elo rated players.

Yeah, try again. 1700s, and he already had a win and a draw against 1900 players.

There are no 1200s in the top section. We ain't talking GMs by any stretch - top player at the event is 2376, but this ain't the scrubs section.

sndeww
Compadre_J wrote:
ThrillerFan wrote:

I repeat! I play the Petroff to WIN!

Yeah, We see the type of WIN’s your playing for.

You should be ashamed of yourself for beating up on 1,200 Elo rated players.

never be ashamed to beat up low rated players!!

Compadre_J
sndeww wrote:
Compadre_J wrote:
ThrillerFan wrote:

I repeat! I play the Petroff to WIN!

Yeah, We see the type of WIN’s your playing for.

You should be ashamed of yourself for beating up on 1,200 Elo rated players.

never be ashamed to beat up low rated players!!

You bring Shame to your family for beating up on poor, Nathan.

What a rating mismatch.

ThrillerFan
Compadre_J wrote:
sndeww wrote:
Compadre_J wrote:
ThrillerFan wrote:

I repeat! I play the Petroff to WIN!

Yeah, We see the type of WIN’s your playing for.

You should be ashamed of yourself for beating up on 1,200 Elo rated players.

never be ashamed to beat up low rated players!!

You bring Shame to your family for beating up on poor, Nathan.

What a rating mismatch.

You bring Shame to your family for being an utter disgrace on the chess.com forums. You get paired against whoever you get paired against. Like when I won the third round in post 11, it was completely beyond my control who I faced. I played in the open section. You cannot go any higher than that. The fact that I played a 2243, 1888, 1741, 1704, and 1857 (LWWWD) was completely out of my control.

The situation was likely the same for sndeww.

You play who you are assigned to face. The fact that you can't accept that and try to smear the reputation of others on this site makes you nothing more than a complete disgrace to God!

sndeww
Compadre_J wrote:

You bring Shame to your family for beating up on poor, Nathan.

What a rating mismatch.

I bring honor to my family with every victory.

If you don't like it, win!

sndeww
ThrillerFan wrote:

You bring Shame to your family for being an utter disgrace on the chess.com forums. You get paired against whoever you get paired against. Like when I won the third round in post 11, it was completely beyond my control who I faced. I played in the open section. You cannot go any higher than that. The fact that I played a 2243, 1888, 1741, 1704, and 1857 (LWWWD) was completely out of my control.

The situation was likely the same for sndeww.

You play who you are assigned to face. The fact that you can't accept that and try to smear the reputation of others on this site makes you nothing more than a complete disgrace to God!

Nooooo, you can't do that!!! Using logic and knowledge about tournaments is not allowed in this debate!!!

Compadre_J
ThrillerFan wrote:
Compadre_J wrote:
sndeww wrote:
Compadre_J wrote:
ThrillerFan wrote:

I repeat! I play the Petroff to WIN!

Yeah, We see the type of WIN’s your playing for.

You should be ashamed of yourself for beating up on 1,200 Elo rated players.

never be ashamed to beat up low rated players!!

You bring Shame to your family for beating up on poor, Nathan.

What a rating mismatch.

You bring Shame to your family for being an utter disgrace on the chess.com forums. You get paired against whoever you get paired against. Like when I won the third round in post 11, it was completely beyond my control who I faced. I played in the open section. You cannot go any higher than that. The fact that I played a 2243, 1888, 1741, 1704, and 1857 (LWWWD) was completely out of my control.

The situation was likely the same for sndeww.

You play who you are assigned to face. The fact that you can't accept that and try to smear the reputation of others on this site makes you nothing more than a complete disgrace to God!

WowowoW - You didn’t say it was an OTB Tournament.

You still haven’t said it was an OTB game.

You also didn’t show your opponents rating!

—————————————

Don’t Blame me for calling you out on your Suspicious Dishonest Chess Nature.

You only said you was entering a Tournament.

I have seen the Dishonest Tournaments people have entered on Chess sites.

A 2,000 rated player pretending to be King of the Universe against bunch of 1,400 rated players.

Happens all the time! - We have name for these Dishonest Chess Players!

We call the Noob Stompers or Fake 2k players.

————————————————

Most OTB Chess Tournament's have Ceiling & Floor to prevent Rating Mismatch.

It matches people with similar ratings.

Its very unlikely for a person to get matched with huge rating mismatch.

————————————————

You can’t lie to us!

You have no control because only the Tournament Officials have control to create rating fairness.

‘That’s the way it should be.

———————————

Did you play against a 1,400 rated player or not?

What was his rating?

If you did, Than you deserve to be shamed.

You should have called the Arbiter to talk about the rating mismatch.

The only Honest thing to do is to tell Arbiter so they can fix the error.

sndeww
Compadre_J wrote:

Most OTB Chess Tournament's have Ceiling & Floor to prevent Rating Mismatch.

It matches people with similar ratings.

Its very unlikely for a person to get matched with huge rating mismatch.

————————————————

You can’t lie to us!

You have no control because only the Tournament Officials have control to create rating fairness.

‘That’s the way it should be.

———————————

Did you play against a 1,400 rated player or not?

What was his rating?

If you did, Than you deserve to be shamed.

You should have called the Arbiter to talk about the rating mismatch.

The only Honest thing to do is to tell Arbiter so they can fix the error.

Ceiling? Ceiling where? Do you mean sections, like U1200, U1800, etc? Some smaller tournaments only have a few sections, like U1200 and Open (this is the case for my university's chess club tournaments). Some tournaments have no sections - the state scholastic is one of them, as it is divided by school level (high, middle, elementary). It's very common to play low rated players.

Rating floors also do more to create mismatches than mitigate! Imagine a player who plays at 1700 strength, but because of his floor, he's at 1900.... isn't that just free rating points?

And low rated players can sign up for higher rated sections. I'd know - I've done it before!

U2100 as a 1600:

And calling the arbiter? Because your opponent's rating is too low? Are you joking?