Good morning
2100s FEAR this opening…
Sort:
23 days ago
0
#24
Ponziani Part 2: I played a lot better and entered a very stressful middlegame where I had to pull off some Petrosian-level defense.
Initially, I succeeded. Then time trouble set in and I choked. :v
23 days ago
0
#25
abadchessplayer010101 wrote:
I am 2180 and do not fear this opening
1. You’re a Sicilian player by the looks of things, so it would be weird for you to fear an e4 e5 opening.
2. This is clearly aimed at rapid 2100, which is different from blitz 2100 - you should in theory be a stronger player.
3. I am immediately suspicious of any player who’s above 2000 in any time control after less than three weeks on the platform, I sincerely hope this is an alt account for you.
23 days ago
0
#26
LadyCockroach wrote:
Honestly this opening is nasty in the best way 😄 it looks calm on the surface but it’s full of little traps and awkward decisions that can make even strong players feel uncomfortable very quickly. Super tricky, very practical, and clearly dangerous if you don’t know exactly what ur doing. Only downside is repeating the same line against who experienced playing against it recently. It's one of those openings you should not re-do against the same opponent.
True, as with many openings (particularly my choices!) if you have frequent opponents who learn the pitfalls to avoid it loses some of its sting. But, tbh, this is the case for nearly every opening, particularly for us amateurs who only learn a few pet lines per option for black…
23 days ago
0
#27
abadchessplayer010101 wrote:
I am 2180 and do not fear this opening
I don't fear it either lol
23 days ago
0
#28
tonyskyer wrote:
abadchessplayer010101 wrote:
I am 2180 and do not fear this opening
I don't fear it either lol
You perhaps should: while you’re predominantly not an e5 player, the games where you did play e4 e5 the ponziani was your worst performing opening choice.
22 days ago
0
#29
DoYouLikeCurry wrote:
tonyskyer wrote:
abadchessplayer010101 wrote:
I am 2180 and do not fear this opening
I don't fear it either lol
You perhaps should: while you’re predominantly not an e5 player, the games where you did play e4 e5 the ponziani was your worst performing opening choice.
50% isn't bad though, and it's the worst because I have a high win rate in all the other moves
DoYouLikeCurry wrote:
pfren wrote:
DoYouLikeCurry wrote:
medelpad wrote:
3. Nf6, d4, exd4, e5, nd5 just looks pretty miserable for white
Not at all, there are tonnes of very promising lines.
These are two of the most common continuations after that line, and there’s plenty else excellent, too.
And, for further reference, here’s my win rate after Nd5:
All openings are promising if the other side plays poor chess.
7...dxc3 isn't something that any half-serious player would play. Either 7...d5 or 7...d6 are the moves which fully comply to the opening principles.
While you are, of course, correct that d6 and d5 are superior options, I suppose it depends significantly on what we call “half serious players”. For the vast vast majority of this platform, even my very amateur rating is beyond their aspirations: how many players see 2000 rapid as the ultimate attainment in chess?
At master level, the ponziani isn’t played with good reason; there are better ways to eke out an advantage over your opponents. But at club level, it’s a wonderful weapon that has been probably my most successful opening above 2000.
To illustrate the point - I switched the lichess database to 2200+, and dxc3 is still played between one and two games every ten… (when viewing the entire lichess database, it’s played nearly 40% of the time, hence it’s the line I chose to demonstrate)
This line is what I play as Black, because it can also be used against the Goring Gambit, so there is no need to study another line on an opening which is played extremely rarely.
And there is a reason the Ponziani is played extremely rarely: It is a poor opening, by any standards, which allows Black many ways to achieve a very good game- some of them being very sharp (e.g. the 3...Nf6 4.d4 Nxe4 5.d5 Bc5 line), and some slow positional stuff, like 3...d5 4.Qa4 f6.
At least other White openings after 1...e5 limit Black's choices to get a good game- not the case with the Ponziani.
22 days ago
0
#31
pfren wrote:
DoYouLikeCurry wrote:
pfren wrote:
DoYouLikeCurry wrote:
medelpad wrote:
3. Nf6, d4, exd4, e5, nd5 just looks pretty miserable for white
Not at all, there are tonnes of very promising lines.
These are two of the most common continuations after that line, and there’s plenty else excellent, too.
And, for further reference, here’s my win rate after Nd5:
All openings are promising if the other side plays poor chess.
7...dxc3 isn't something that any half-serious player would play. Either 7...d5 or 7...d6 are the moves which fully comply to the opening principles.
While you are, of course, correct that d6 and d5 are superior options, I suppose it depends significantly on what we call “half serious players”. For the vast vast majority of this platform, even my very amateur rating is beyond their aspirations: how many players see 2000 rapid as the ultimate attainment in chess?
At master level, the ponziani isn’t played with good reason; there are better ways to eke out an advantage over your opponents. But at club level, it’s a wonderful weapon that has been probably my most successful opening above 2000.
To illustrate the point - I switched the lichess database to 2200+, and dxc3 is still played between one and two games every ten… (when viewing the entire lichess database, it’s played nearly 40% of the time, hence it’s the line I chose to demonstrate)
This line is what I play as Black, because it can also be used against the Goring Gambit, so there is no need to study another line on an opening which is played extremely rarely.
And there is a reason the Ponziani is played extremely rarely: It is a poor opening, by any standards, which allows Black many ways to achieve a very good game- some of them being very sharp (e.g. the 3...Nf6 4.d4 Nxe4 5.d5 Bc5 line), and some slow positional stuff, like 3...d5 4.Qa4 f6.
At least other White openings after 1...e5 limit Black's choices to get a good game- not the case with the Ponziani.
The bc5 line is very sharp indeed - and leads to pure chaos - but is honestly very unlikely to be played at sub master level (as you say, not many people study the ponziani, and to give up a piece like that without knowing the line is bold, to say the least).
My least favourite is probably the f6 lines, but even these are thoroughly playable. I think we’re looking at this opening through different lenses: I wouldn’t suggest an IM plays the ponziani - certainly not in classical - but for 99%+ of chess players the ponziani is an excellent weapon.
My rating puts me in the top 0.2% of chesscom, and I’ve shown above how positive a score I have with it.
I must say, though, there are surely examples of masters not being able to capitalise on the modest -0.2 or so advantage playing perfectly against the ponziani affords? I’d say at nearly any level a well-prepared opening at near equality has got to be as valuable as the evaluation?
DoYouLikeCurry wrote:
pfren wrote:
DoYouLikeCurry wrote:
pfren wrote:
DoYouLikeCurry wrote:
medelpad wrote:
3. Nf6, d4, exd4, e5, nd5 just looks pretty miserable for white
Not at all, there are tonnes of very promising lines.
These are two of the most common continuations after that line, and there’s plenty else excellent, too.
And, for further reference, here’s my win rate after Nd5:
All openings are promising if the other side plays poor chess.
7...dxc3 isn't something that any half-serious player would play. Either 7...d5 or 7...d6 are the moves which fully comply to the opening principles.
While you are, of course, correct that d6 and d5 are superior options, I suppose it depends significantly on what we call “half serious players”. For the vast vast majority of this platform, even my very amateur rating is beyond their aspirations: how many players see 2000 rapid as the ultimate attainment in chess?
At master level, the ponziani isn’t played with good reason; there are better ways to eke out an advantage over your opponents. But at club level, it’s a wonderful weapon that has been probably my most successful opening above 2000.
To illustrate the point - I switched the lichess database to 2200+, and dxc3 is still played between one and two games every ten… (when viewing the entire lichess database, it’s played nearly 40% of the time, hence it’s the line I chose to demonstrate)
This line is what I play as Black, because it can also be used against the Goring Gambit, so there is no need to study another line on an opening which is played extremely rarely.
And there is a reason the Ponziani is played extremely rarely: It is a poor opening, by any standards, which allows Black many ways to achieve a very good game- some of them being very sharp (e.g. the 3...Nf6 4.d4 Nxe4 5.d5 Bc5 line), and some slow positional stuff, like 3...d5 4.Qa4 f6.
At least other White openings after 1...e5 limit Black's choices to get a good game- not the case with the Ponziani.
The bc5 line is very sharp indeed - and leads to pure chaos - but is honestly very unlikely to be played at sub master level (as you say, not many people study the ponziani, and to give up a piece like that without knowing the line is bold, to say the least).
My least favourite is probably the f6 lines, but even these are thoroughly playable. I think we’re looking at this opening through different lenses: I wouldn’t suggest an IM plays the ponziani - certainly not in classical - but for 99%+ of chess players the ponziani is an excellent weapon.
My rating puts me in the top 0.2% of chesscom, and I’ve shown above how positive a score I have with it.
I must say, though, there are surely examples of masters not being able to capitalise on the modest -0.2 or so advantage playing perfectly against the ponziani affords? I’d say at nearly any level a well-prepared opening at near equality has got to be as valuable as the evaluation?
I wouldn't mind at all playing as white some -0.7 or so line, if I had a clear way to play, and Black's defense requires some "only moves" and unorthodox engine-like calculations.
But there are no such lines in the Ponziani- actually I think that even the dubious Danish Gambit is a better practical choice.
All [you know what goes here] and giggles till somebody plays the sicilian💀
22 days ago
0
#34
pfren wrote:
DoYouLikeCurry wrote:
pfren wrote:
DoYouLikeCurry wrote:
pfren wrote:
DoYouLikeCurry wrote:
medelpad wrote:
3. Nf6, d4, exd4, e5, nd5 just looks pretty miserable for white
Not at all, there are tonnes of very promising lines.
These are two of the most common continuations after that line, and there’s plenty else excellent, too.
And, for further reference, here’s my win rate after Nd5:
All openings are promising if the other side plays poor chess.
7...dxc3 isn't something that any half-serious player would play. Either 7...d5 or 7...d6 are the moves which fully comply to the opening principles.
While you are, of course, correct that d6 and d5 are superior options, I suppose it depends significantly on what we call “half serious players”. For the vast vast majority of this platform, even my very amateur rating is beyond their aspirations: how many players see 2000 rapid as the ultimate attainment in chess?
At master level, the ponziani isn’t played with good reason; there are better ways to eke out an advantage over your opponents. But at club level, it’s a wonderful weapon that has been probably my most successful opening above 2000.
To illustrate the point - I switched the lichess database to 2200+, and dxc3 is still played between one and two games every ten… (when viewing the entire lichess database, it’s played nearly 40% of the time, hence it’s the line I chose to demonstrate)
This line is what I play as Black, because it can also be used against the Goring Gambit, so there is no need to study another line on an opening which is played extremely rarely.
And there is a reason the Ponziani is played extremely rarely: It is a poor opening, by any standards, which allows Black many ways to achieve a very good game- some of them being very sharp (e.g. the 3...Nf6 4.d4 Nxe4 5.d5 Bc5 line), and some slow positional stuff, like 3...d5 4.Qa4 f6.
At least other White openings after 1...e5 limit Black's choices to get a good game- not the case with the Ponziani.
The bc5 line is very sharp indeed - and leads to pure chaos - but is honestly very unlikely to be played at sub master level (as you say, not many people study the ponziani, and to give up a piece like that without knowing the line is bold, to say the least).
My least favourite is probably the f6 lines, but even these are thoroughly playable. I think we’re looking at this opening through different lenses: I wouldn’t suggest an IM plays the ponziani - certainly not in classical - but for 99%+ of chess players the ponziani is an excellent weapon.
My rating puts me in the top 0.2% of chesscom, and I’ve shown above how positive a score I have with it.
I must say, though, there are surely examples of masters not being able to capitalise on the modest -0.2 or so advantage playing perfectly against the ponziani affords? I’d say at nearly any level a well-prepared opening at near equality has got to be as valuable as the evaluation?
I wouldn't mind at all playing as white some -0.7 or so line, if I had a clear way to play, and Black's defense requires some "only moves" and unorthodox engine-like calculations.
But there are no such lines in the Ponziani- actually I think that even the dubious Danish Gambit is a better practical choice.
I love the Danish as much as the next man, but I can’t help but think you’re being a little contrarian for no real reason, here. Sure, it might not be objectively the most ambitious choice for white at master level - but the list of openings that are is realistically countable on your hands - and at all other levels the ponziani is demonstrably effective.
Honestly this opening is nasty in the best way 😄 it looks calm on the surface but its full of little traps and awkward decisions that can make even strong players feel uncomfortable very quickly. Super tricky, very practical, and clearly dangerous if you don’t know exactly what ur doing. Only downside is repeating the same line against who experienced playing against it recently. It's one of those openings you should not re-do against the same opponent.