Your Repertoire

Have you tried the Benoni?

Yes sir ! However, I didn't like it that much. It's hard to explain why not, as it has a lot of similarities to the KID (which I like a lot) but somehow I felt the KID allowed for more creativity. Like, a bit more complex plans than the Benoni systems which mostly seem to revolve around the e5 square, so Bg4 and Bxf3 is an idea, and the e-file (correct me if I'm wrong, I ain't an expert on the Benoni). I also didn't really like the backward pawn on d6; in a way the KID just seemed to have more solid fundations. It's also more of a feeling why I like the one more than the other, bit hard to explain so hope you get my point a bit.

It's a repertoire based on the strategy of playing mainly solid as White and fully aggressive as Black. Although it works very well when in good shape (and, generally, against lower rated opponents), I always wondered whether this was really the best way to cope with openings.

As for the modern Benoni it's a mixed bag : it's a pleasant opening, fun and very thematic, but at the same time after one single inaccuracy you get a completely prospectless position so you have to find the best move at every turn to get some activity, it's quite demanding. That's less true for Bg4xf3 systems though.

It's entirely true; as Black I just can't stand to play positionally (bit of an exaggeration, because once in a while you get positional games etc). I really want to go for it and play sharp, backed up with a ton of theory. With White, however, I count on the small plus that goes along with it.

It seems to be a theory-heavy repertoire, both with white and with black.

Do you play OTB? If yes, at what rating do you think you're gonna get out-theoried?

That was a legitimate concern for me and one of the reasons I stopped playing the sicilian. The other reason is that the sicilian sucks :)

Yes, it kinda is. Opening theory is a specialty of mine, like my biggest trumph card. I play OTB at around 2050-2100 FIDE and usually know more theory (especially in the KID and Sicilian, not so much when I'm White) than people up to 2400 FIDE. However, I don't always win those games because opening theory can obviously only bring you so much.

Well the Benoni is just a trick in the bag - just looking that basically all of your openings are fiancheto variations, so that just boggled my mind.

I was thinking on looking at the catalan at some point, but i prefer e4 or f4 with white more then d4.

Also if you say openings are a speciality of yours, you should refocus a bit :)

I've been focussing on endgames more the last year however openings are still the most fascinating to me.

@ashwing95 that's quite a solid repertoire. Sounds like u put thought into transposition options too. Some people fall victim to move order tricks, you don't seem to.

I'm still learning a lot of opening theory, so I am trying to play more flexible openings to see more positions and learn from them. But right now, I play..

White 

1. e4
-Giuoco Piano - Evan's Gambit
-Two Knights 
-3.c4 against the Sicilian
-3.e5 advanced variation vs Caro-Kann
-2.d4 against Modern/fianchetto openings

Black

Nimzowitsch systems.
- e5 vs e4, Nc6, d4 and e4, Nc6, Nf3
- a lot of Queen's Pawn vs d4 or Nf3
- Queen's Gambit vs d4, Nc6, c4
- Reversed Sicilian vs English-style openings like c4, Nc6, Nc3, e5

 I have some standard and even "original" stuff I cook up sometimes:

Some Four Knights Analysis:

Many lines with the Berlin Defence (both the mainline with h3 and ...h5 and the d3 and Qe2 variations.) Some Queen's Gambit stuff, Nimzo-Larsen Attack (1.b3 and 1.Nf3 with 2.b3) 1.e4 and 1.d4,Nf6 2.Nf3 as white to avoid the Budapest and not commit a pawn to c4 in case black opts for the Benoni (the knight will go to f3 anyway whereas I'm not completely sure I want a pawn on c4 yet.) 

As black again sometimes I'll go for a Dutch:

White:

King's Indian Petrosian System

Bogo-Indian Defense

Queen's Gambit

Horwitz Defense

Dutch Defense

Black:

Benoni Defense (and most of its variations)

Slav: Modern Line

Caro-Kann Defense

Caro-Kann Defense: Accelereated Panov Attack

Zukertort Opening: Kingside Fianchetto

English Opening: Symmetrical Variation

Icelandic Gambit

Nimzo Indian Defense

I've got most of these down, but I'm still working on improving my ability to play the Indians and the slav. I prefer King's Indian Petrosian System as white and Benoni and Caro-Kann as black.

Hmm...there are a lot of people on this site who might play me in tournaments and know who I am...so maybe I shouldn't post all of it. But then again, what the hell, I usually have no problems with the opening even against masters.

As white I usually play d4, I also might play e4, and if I feel like it I may also play c4. It's not easy to prep for me as white, but I do have some openings that I sort of specialize in for each of those opening moves. For instance, I love playing the Queen's Gambit Declined Exchange as white (and sometimes black also), and I like Bb5 Sicilians when I play e4. I also enjoy the Botvinnik System when I do play c4 once in a blue moon, if my opponent allows.

As black, if my opponent plays 1. e4, I will probably play 1...c5, but I might play 1...e6 also, and I used to play 1...e5 and come back to it occasionally when I feel like it. So again, not consistent- I do have a preferred move, but it is still not possible for my opponent to be certain what I will play. When I play c5 I also might play the Accelerated Dragon, or I might play the Taimanov, and when I play the French, on 3. Nc3 it depends on circumstances whether I will play 3...Nf6 or 3...dxe4. Against 1. d4 I have played 1...d5 all my life, and I have favored the Classical Slav, but I like the Semi-Slav and Chebanenko Slav also (the latter of which I have never tried in a tournament, although I have employed both the Classical and Semi-Slav before with success). Against the English I have honestly never found a response I am highly satisfied with. In the past I have favored 1...e5, and then after 1. Nf3 Nf6 2. c4 I would play 2...c6, which is probably (but I can't guarantee) what I would play today. I do also play the Symmetrical English from time to time, although I got my butt kicked in it by two experts at the Arlington Chess Club recently so I am a bit hesitent now.

I have a very wide repertoire, and can play lots of things, but I certainly do have a "main repertoire" and then a bunch of secondary openings. I tend to lean towards 1. d4 over 1. e4, and lately I have been playing the Sicilian much more often than other openings against 1. e4. The lines within my repertoire are mainly not memorization-heavy, especially when I am playing e4. My 1. e4 repertoire, in spite of the move's inherent reputation as an attacking opening, is mainly full of more positional variations.

I almost never have issues in the opening in my games, and when I have, it has usually been because I tried to take on theoretical openings that I didn't know enough, which I am not likely to do today.

The biggest hole in my repertoire, and one which for my entire life I have never satisfactorily answered, is finding a line for white to play consistently against the King's Indian Defense. I do not like facing that opening and I have tried everything in tournaments (Mar del Plata, Smyslov's System, 5. Bf4 line, Fianchetto, Makogonov Variation) with almost no success whatsoever. It seems that whenever a player rated above 1800 or 1900 plays the K.I.D. against me in a tournament, I am already at a disadvantage because I know I will not like the resulting position and will either not be as booked-up as my opponent, or I will play some stupid sideline that will pose no serious problem for my opponent. The Saemisch Variation is a line I maybe should look at, but it feels totally different and out-of place with the rest of my repertoire and with my style, since I have never been someone who likes castling on opposite sides and throwing pawns at the opponent's king. And otherwise, I think I have almost exhausted all possibilities in finding a line against that damn opening. I just can't find anything that I like and it's frustrating.

http://www.chess.com/blog/X_PLAYER_J_X/chess-repertoire-3

@dpnorman very interesting how you master various openings. I play Sämisch with White and I like it a lot, but it requires quite a bit of study. As for revealing your repertoire, that is the reason why I didn't put my real name in my profile 

1. d4

QGD: Exchange

Bg5 vs Semi-Slav

Bg5 vs Dutch

Saemisch vs KID/Grunfeld

3. e4 vs QGA

Rubinstein vs Nimzo

Against e4

Berlin vs Ruy

Two Knights vs Bc4

Against d4

Grunfeld

Against c4

Neo-Grunfeld

Looks like we have a similar repertoire.

in the previous season I played the colle-zukertort as white, Nc6 against e4 and 1...d6 2...e5 or Bg4 against d4 against other openings I usually winged it a bit. For next season I decided on a more attacking repertoire which does include some theory of course:
1 e4 :
c5: probably gonna be the smith-morra
c6: panov botvinnik
d5 2 exd5 Qxd5:just play chess, not to afraid of this one
d5 2 exd5 Nf6 3 c4: hang on to the pawn: after c6 transpose to a panov, after e6 just be a pawn up and whether the storm
d6: austrian attack
e5: king's gambit
e6: not sure yet but probably reti gambit
g6: austrian attack
in all other cases just play normal chess

as black:
against e4: alekhine defense
against d4: benko gambit or tango
against c4: either a reversed grand-prix or b6 not sure yet
against f4: thinking of from's gambit

if anyone has any comments on the choices made that would be appreciated :)
 

That's impressive, even considering that you're a young player (I looked at your profile). Don't you have problems when you go against a player who's been playing a certain opening for more time that you're alive?

I also wanted to ask you: how much theory do you think it's necessary to play at around 2000 FIDE (that would be my goal if I start playing seriously again)?

Of course this will vary depending on openings, but if I avoid the super-theoretical lines do you think that 10 or 12 moves of theory would be enough?

No, not usually do I have opening related problems solely based on experience. Opening theory constantly evolves after all, so when I played through and really understood the latest work(s) I shouldn't be much inferior. I think the key thing about learning openings is knowing how to handle the sort of middlegame you get out of it. If both me and my opponent got a feeling for those positions, then it can happen their experience can give them an edge. But that shouldn't be enough to win by itself.

Well, if you avoid the most theoretical lines then 10-12 moves seems like a nice estimation. By then you should have all your pieces out and an acceptable position. If you want you can tell me what stuff you play now and I can suggest some less theoretical lines, pretty much every opening has ''easy'' variations. In the KID I have to know some variations about 25 moves deep to avoid being blown off the board