I have recently started playing the Ruy Lopez and I've not once found it to be drawish.
The Ruy is a very popular opening, apparently. There was a time when not a day went by without me reading the words Ruy Lopez at least once.
It's a good opening. I took to it recently for a change of wind. I avoided it before then because I disliked committing my bishop to the queenside.
My opinion, which is an old one of an older person, is that black gets activity and a weakness on dark squares. As long as Black stays active, he is fine. If black drifts for a few moves he can get a depressing position due to dark sq weaknesses. There are a few lines where you gotta know them and can't play on principle, but fewer than e.g. Sicilians.
I think the Open Spanish isn't played much anymore because black seems to get a drawn but inferior endgame in a lot of the lines... Karpov's Ng5 sacrifice really hurt the Open Lopez at the top level. However, it is probably perfectly fine OTB at lower levels, because I doubt many white players study the theory deeply.
Consider looking at Anand's Open Lopez games, because I think he still plays the opening as black.
My opinion, which is an old one of an older person, is that black gets activity and a weakness on dark squares. As long as Black stays active, he is fine. If black drifts for a few moves he can get a depressing position due to dark sq weaknesses. There are a few lines where you gotta know them and can't play on principle, but fewer than e.g. Sicilians.
You can play ALL of modern and conventional opening theory on principle. That said, a Botvinik semi slav or a najdorf sicilian just requires you to have a better understanding of high level chess and good equity / decision making to figure out all by yourself.
Maybe you could do it but I'm not sure I could get through Dilworth on principle. My experience with it [from only a few games but one was against a specialist] is that whoever has studied it more deeply has a significant advantage.
Yeah, Dilworth is a tricky variation, but can be easily avoided with Nbd2. Even Magnus lost a game in a simul playing as White against it.
Here is the game if anyone is inrerested: https://www.ichess.net/blog/the-dilworth-variation/
... Karpov's Ng5 sacrifice really hurt the Open Lopez ...
You probably already know this, but a lot of top players attribute that sacrifice to Tal. He was present at the match in the role of a journalist, but wasn't an official member of Karpov's team, so he was not publicly credited with the innovation.
11. Ng5 is not a sacrifice. Also I have seen it attributed to Zaitsev instead of Tal.
Also Ng5 wasn't really taken up in huge numbers from what I read.
69AlphaMale what you are saying is wrong and contradicted by what every single grandmaster ever says.
11. Ng5 is not a sacrifice. Also I have seen it attributed to Zaitsev instead of Tal.
A lot of people had the idea to play 11.Ng5. In chess, the wheel is reinvented frequently.
No they didn't. I am confident that nobody ever played Ng5 in that position before Karpov.
You haven't the slightest clue what you're talking about.
Korchnoi said it was the type of move you would see once in a 100 years.
Just stop being an idiot, take your diarrhea nonsense elsewhere.
We're talking about chess, not about you. Take your issues elsewhere and don't spread idiot misinformation such as that good players don't need opening theory here.
very theoretical. DO NOT play the open Spanish if you don't know at least 10 moves of theory...
very theoretical. DO NOT play the open Spanish if you don't know at least 10 moves of theory...
Very theoretical = requires 10 moves of theory, lol.
He means 10 moves of theory in many directions from the starting point of the open you numpty, not move ten from the start of the game. Also I highly doubt the typical club white players will be able to force a win, it's not like the yugoslav attack where the moves play themselves.
Yes 10 moves deep and knowing how to play the position, yes.
I'm starting to think you can barely move the pieces never mind being a decent player. You're all bluff, but when you bluff really badly it's very obvious to others you had no idea what you're talking about.
Daily doesn't appeal to me. It is like playing someone with no clock.
It's hard for me to imagine someone so pathetic that they say:
"Let's settle our argument... with a game of chess!".
As you said yourself in another thread even little kids can be really good at chess. It's a toy, like Ludo or Snakes and Ladders. And it can be fun. But when you take it seriously is when it all goes downhill.
Hey all,
The first "real" opening I ever learned was the Ruy Lopez, and I play it with both sides. Today I was playing the Play Magnus app (age 9), which at my level is reasonably challenging, and I tried the open variation for the first time and I really stomped him. I found the development to be extremely logical and the positions seemed easy to play, so I plan to keep experimenting with it.
My question is what sort of reputation the open Ruy has. Looking at chessgames.com, it looks like it was a favorite of Victor Korchnoi and is still played by top players. But I'm curious what the overall view of it is (e.g., is it drawish, etc.). Does anyone know good sources on this?
Thanks!