Did you also spend a lot of time searching for a defence to 1.e4?
Sort:
Aug 14, 2019
0
#2
Botvinnik used to play the French, and I think also Korchnoi. Very known was Wolfgang Uhlmann, who always played the French.
French is strong, though I stopped playing it OTB once I began facing FMs and IMs. At that level, my games became all about fighting not to lose, struggling for a draw. The e6 square can pose problems in several lines.
I switched to Modern for more of a fighting chance. Online I often noodle around with Caro and Scandi, too, just to hit the d-pawn (or clear the d-file) without the bad bishop problems. I like the bishop mobility more in either three cases.
But if you're enjoying French, stick with it. Become a beast with it! A lot of e4 players hate facing it against an experienced opponent. See the games of Morozevich and Nakamura.
Aug 14, 2019
0
#4
GearWound wrote:
French is strong, though I stopped playing it OTB once I began facing FMs and IMs. At that level, my games became all about fighting not to lose, struggling for a draw. The e6 square can pose problems in several lines.
I switched to Modern for more of a fighting chance. Online I often noodle around with Caro and Scandi, too, just to hit the d-pawn (or clear the d-file) without the bad bishop problems. I like the bishop mobility more in either three cases.
But if you're enjoying French, stick with it. Become a beast with it! A lot of e4 players hate facing it against an experienced opponent. See the games of Morozevich and Nakamura.
Let’s say that at the moment the French is the defence where I seem to know a little bit better how to proceed. I bought a book on the Caro and thought this could be a possibility, but at the end of some lines I thought I would prefer to be on the white’s side. I know that the modern can be great, but you really have to know exactly what you are doing to attack white’s center at the exact moment. I always had problems playing against it at blitz, the centre seemed always to explode at my face.
Aug 15, 2019
0
#5
In all of my games since two years I choose the London System. Why? It is not so well known, it's surprising and - the best of all - it forces white to be quite offensive ... Here is a sample move 1-4
torrubirubi님이 썼습니다:
I don’t know about you but I tried a lot of things against 1.e4.
1...e5 was the starting point, but soon I began to search for other defences (I didn’t like to play against the Italian or the Bishop game). For a while I tried the Scandi with ...Qa5, but soon I realised that I was the guy usually getting in troubles, even against players who basically never learned anything about this opening. Sicilian was somehow to high for me, I never really understood what I had to do.
After a while I tried the Scandi with ...Qd8, and this felt somehow better for me, losing a move, but at least not concerned about my queen getting attacked. I learned a repertoire by the famous IM John Bartholomew. Again it came to a point where I felt that the Scandi was more difficult for me than for my opponent, and I went on searching.
Since a while I am giving the French a chance, and I have somehow the impression that this opening fits to my style. What I really like about it is that I usually understand what is going on: I have a bad bishop and I will try to exchange it, while trying to keep the other one, and I know my pawn levers (...c5 and sometimes ...f6). Kind of straightforward stuff that makes easier to play when you are out of the book. By playing the French I got used to the idea of sometimes not castling, or castling by hand, or to allow double pawns to get the rooks active against the white king.
Sometimes you have to play very precise, but not the kind of accuracy that you see in the open Sicilian (I mean, at least how I perceive it). And the gambits are not that difficult to handle, and sometimes you can afford to not accept the gambit pawn to get a comfortable position.
I am learning with the book Master the French by NM Bryan Tillis and GM Lenderman. I use the digital format available in Chessable, where you review your lines using spaced repetition. You can also purchase a video to the book, which is perhaps a little expensive but very useful to memorise / understand the key tactical and strategical ideas.
1...e5 was the starting point, but soon I began to search for other defences (I didn’t like to play against the Italian or the Bishop game). For a while I tried the Scandi with ...Qa5, but soon I realised that I was the guy usually getting in troubles, even against players who basically never learned anything about this opening. Sicilian was somehow to high for me, I never really understood what I had to do.
After a while I tried the Scandi with ...Qd8, and this felt somehow better for me, losing a move, but at least not concerned about my queen getting attacked. I learned a repertoire by the famous IM John Bartholomew. Again it came to a point where I felt that the Scandi was more difficult for me than for my opponent, and I went on searching.
Since a while I am giving the French a chance, and I have somehow the impression that this opening fits to my style. What I really like about it is that I usually understand what is going on: I have a bad bishop and I will try to exchange it, while trying to keep the other one, and I know my pawn levers (...c5 and sometimes ...f6). Kind of straightforward stuff that makes easier to play when you are out of the book. By playing the French I got used to the idea of sometimes not castling, or castling by hand, or to allow double pawns to get the rooks active against the white king.
Sometimes you have to play very precise, but not the kind of accuracy that you see in the open Sicilian (I mean, at least how I perceive it). And the gambits are not that difficult to handle, and sometimes you can afford to not accept the gambit pawn to get a comfortable position.
I am learning with the book Master the French by NM Bryan Tillis and GM Lenderman. I use the digital format available in Chessable, where you review your lines using spaced repetition. You can also purchase a video to the book, which is perhaps a little expensive but very useful to memorise / understand the key tactical and strategical ideas.
Yup. 1...e5 was the starting point for me too and it seemed fine but then I got humilated against a weaker player and switched to Sicilian. It's currently giving me very good results though I'm also thinking about the French. Also in casual/unrated games I occasionally play Caro-Kann.
French is a very sound opening.
Aug 15, 2019
0
#8
I suggest learning the Nimzowich defense. After 1. e4 black play Nc6. It contains a lot of traps and results in positions that are very easy to play. There is a comprehensive series of YouTube by GJ_Chess. Look for it. Thank me later. 
Depends on time controls. If daily I'll play e5. If blitz ill play caro
when i started on chessable i used the short and sweet italian, short and sweet slav, and “winged it” vs 1.e4
as i started to play more otb tournaments i quickly found opponents had better prep against my 1.e4 (so i switched to john bartholomew’s 1.d4 book) and the players who played 1.e4 were better versed vs 1...e5 than i was at playing 1...e5
so- because chessable didnt have a short and sweet french and i already had short and sweet slav (taken from tom bartell’s more comprehensive slav book) i decided to get both of tom bartells slav and caro kann books
so, for better or worse, i am now a caro kann player- and it has helped my overall chess development; at least all of the 1.e4 1...c6 games get filtered through this even when everything goes out of book early; i have learned to get better at recognizing when white could have a very strong attack against a kingside castle; i have learned to not get hung up on castling too early or only to kingside as many caro kann games have me castling queenside or not at all; i have yet to experience this “drawish dullness” in the caro kann as every game is a new adventure
learning how to leverage the c6-c5 break is also helping improve my chess game overall as well
nevertheless, i am sure the french is just as rich and entertaining
(also- most opponents played sicilian versus my old 1.e4 and i had no idea what to do or how to approach it; i even tried to learn the smith morra but i didnt have enough game to pull that off- so i am now a 1d4 2c4 player with white)
as i started to play more otb tournaments i quickly found opponents had better prep against my 1.e4 (so i switched to john bartholomew’s 1.d4 book) and the players who played 1.e4 were better versed vs 1...e5 than i was at playing 1...e5
so- because chessable didnt have a short and sweet french and i already had short and sweet slav (taken from tom bartell’s more comprehensive slav book) i decided to get both of tom bartells slav and caro kann books
so, for better or worse, i am now a caro kann player- and it has helped my overall chess development; at least all of the 1.e4 1...c6 games get filtered through this even when everything goes out of book early; i have learned to get better at recognizing when white could have a very strong attack against a kingside castle; i have learned to not get hung up on castling too early or only to kingside as many caro kann games have me castling queenside or not at all; i have yet to experience this “drawish dullness” in the caro kann as every game is a new adventure
learning how to leverage the c6-c5 break is also helping improve my chess game overall as well
nevertheless, i am sure the french is just as rich and entertaining
(also- most opponents played sicilian versus my old 1.e4 and i had no idea what to do or how to approach it; i even tried to learn the smith morra but i didnt have enough game to pull that off- so i am now a 1d4 2c4 player with white)
Aug 15, 2019
0
#11
Did i spend "a lot of time" on this? No.
Probably like most, I bounced around from opening to opening. Finally settled on the Sicilian Taimanov.
I honestly cannot remember playing anything other than Sicilian or Alekhine against 1. e4, though I'm sure I did when I was younger.
daxypoo wrote:
Interesting. I play almost every black game using the Caro Kann an only 1% of games do I have to castle queenside. Almost always I castle kingside.
Although we might follow different lines, I tend to traverse into a stonewall type defence.
when i started on chessable i used the short and sweet italian, short and sweet slav, and “winged it” vs 1.e4
as i started to play more otb tournaments i quickly found opponents had better prep against my 1.e4 (so i switched to john bartholomew’s 1.d4 book) and the players who played 1.e4 were better versed vs 1...e5 than i was at playing 1...e5
so- because chessable didnt have a short and sweet french and i already had short and sweet slav (taken from tom bartell’s more comprehensive slav book) i decided to get both of tom bartells slav and caro kann books
so, for better or worse, i am now a caro kann player- and it has helped my overall chess development; at least all of the 1.e4 1...c6 games get filtered through this even when everything goes out of book early; i have learned to get better at recognizing when white could have a very strong attack against a kingside castle; i have learned to not get hung up on castling too early or only to kingside as many caro kann games have me castling queenside or not at all; i have yet to experience this “drawish dullness” in the caro kann as every game is a new adventure
learning how to leverage the c6-c5 break is also helping improve my chess game overall as well
nevertheless, i am sure the french is just as rich and entertaining
(also- most opponents played sicilian versus my old 1.e4 and i had no idea what to do or how to approach it; i even tried to learn the smith morra but i didnt have enough game to pull that off- so i am now a 1d4 2c4 player with white)
Any amateur replying to 1.e4 with something other than 1...e5! can be easily labelled as a snob.
Aug 15, 2019
0
#15
pfren wrote:
Any amateur replying to 1.e4 with something other than 1...e5! can be easily labelled as a snob.
But what about all those highly "aggressive" and "tactical" 1000 players?
pfren님이 썼습니다:
Any amateur replying to 1.e4 with something other than 1...e5! can be easily labelled as a snob.
Seriously?
Aug 17, 2019
0
#17
I wasn’t aware but the books Master the French I mentioned above was recently released as a short and sweet edition (only 17 trainable lines). It is a good version to get a feeling for the opening, and it is for free. (In Chessable).
haha i just saw that
as soon as i posted there was nothing on the french i get a message from chessable introducing “new short and sweet on the french defense”
as soon as i posted there was nothing on the french i get a message from chessable introducing “new short and sweet on the french defense”
Aug 17, 2019
0
#19
Yes, I am doing this short and sweet now to learn the main lines. After this I will return to he main course.
I don’t know about you but I tried a lot of things against 1.e4.
1...e5 was the starting point, but soon I began to search for other defences (I didn’t like to play against the Italian or the Bishop game). For a while I tried the Scandi with ...Qa5, but soon I realised that I was the guy usually getting in troubles, even against players who basically never learned anything about this opening. Sicilian was somehow to high for me, I never really understood what I had to do.
After a while I tried the Scandi with ...Qd8, and this felt somehow better for me, losing a move, but at least not concerned about my queen getting attacked. I learned a repertoire by the famous IM John Bartholomew. Again it came to a point where I felt that the Scandi was more difficult for me than for my opponent, and I went on searching.
Since a while I am giving the French a chance, and I have somehow the impression that this opening fits to my style. What I really like about it is that I usually understand what is going on: I have a bad bishop and I will try to exchange it, while trying to keep the other one, and I know my pawn levers (...c5 and sometimes ...f6). Kind of straightforward stuff that makes easier to play when you are out of the book. By playing the French I got used to the idea of sometimes not castling, or castling by hand, or to allow double pawns to get the rooks active against the white king.
Sometimes you have to play very precise, but not the kind of accuracy that you see in the open Sicilian (I mean, at least how I perceive it). And the gambits are not that difficult to handle, and sometimes you can afford to not accept the gambit pawn to get a comfortable position.
I am learning with the book Master the French by NM Bryan Tillis and GM Lenderman. I use the digital format available in Chessable, where you review your lines using spaced repetition. You can also purchase a video to the book, which is perhaps a little expensive but very useful to memorise / understand the key tactical and strategical ideas.