Did you consider Smerdon's Scandinavian repertoire book (2...Nf6)?
I have the book and began to play it without learning more than 20% of he repertoire. But this is definitively not the kind of defence you should play without working through the whole book. The defence doesn’t have a great reputation among strong players. I usually got crushed playing it against much weaker players.
1...c5 for me. It's unbalanced and gives black counterattacking chances in many lines. There's a lot of theory to learn, though.
1...d6
https://www.amazon.com/Play-Against-Everything-Ready-use/dp/9056917447/ref=sr_1_1?crid=16QOXQ81RC18V&keywords=play+1...d6+against+everything&qid=1566137597&s=books&sprefix=play+1...d6%2Cstripbooks%2C189&sr=1-1
https://www.amazon.com/d6-Move-Everyman-Chess/dp/1857446836/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1566137652&sr=1-2
Yes, I tried pretty much everything, before settling on the Sicilian Taimanov for its solidity, dynamism and the fact it doesn't require as much theory knowledge as the Najdorf (that I sometimes didn't really understand anyway, some moves I found really hard to find/understand). I used to play the Dragon, but I found 9 0-0-0 such a killjoy; that was literally the only reason I switched to something else.
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).
Yes. The two "Mastering the French" courses on Chessable by Tillis & Lenderman (one an introduction and free, the other in-depth and not free) are very good!
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.
Seconded there is also a pretty extensive book called Play 1. ...Nc6! - Christof Wisnewski.
OMG I took forever. I went through virtually everything. e5,d5,c5,c6,nc6,g6,e6 OMG it was so annoying. All of those but Nc6 I play on occasion still against worse opponents. The nimzowitsch was my main move for months until the Colorado coutergambit was easy refuted by everyone I played. nowadays thanks to some great analysis on the Cambridge gambit, I play the Alekhine, and the Pirc is now my other main move
I don't know the Pirc defense seems so boring and sluggish.
I don't know the Pirc defense seems so boring and sluggish.
well with bobby Fischer in your profile pic I wouldn't wonder why.
I have heard similar criticism, but I disagree. All you do is get your king safe before seeking active counter play with c6, b5, d5, etc. White can always try to initiate a large attack, but it is very hard to crack open blacks king. I think the difference between it an other popular defenses, like the Sicilian, is that the Sicilian seeks active counter play immediately. The choice of doing which can lead to a easily lost position in a very short period of time. In the nardof especially, you seeking to attack the queen side before developing your king side, and can be severely punished in some situations.
I tried the Taimanov for a while, I had a good feeling with it, but at the end I witched back to the French because I could understand the plans (try to exchange the c8 bishop, play the pawn-breaks...c5 and or ...f6, being not afraid to get your pawn structure destroyed at the kingside after ...0-0, or not castle at all). I am still learning he repertoire and play horrible blitz with it, but this has to do with my poor blitz skills.
Probably spent a bit too much time on this particular in my short chess life thus far. But there's too much choice, so what's a lad to do?
I think pick something that's relatively low maintenance theory-wise and fun and stick with it.
Probably spent a bit too much time on this particular in my short chess life thus far. But there's too much choice, so what's a lad to do?
I think pick something that's relatively low maintenance theory-wise and fun and stick with it.
Yes. It is also important to keep in mind that on the long run you will have an advantage when you know your lines. The problem is that nobody wants to specialize in a defense that doesn't fit to the player's character. And it is a terrible thought when you realize that you spend years learning something that actually is difficult to play (and easy to play for the opponents). Better to spend some times searching, but at the moment that you think you found something sound, you should definitively go for it.
Certainly worth trying different things to see what suits. I quite like the French, but decided on Alekhine's defence. More fun to play and less theory to learn imo.
I think this thread has very good suggestions. Scandanavian is another.
Yes. Playing against e4 is a pain.
Or basically any main first moves for white.
But I always remember that in good hands even the "weak" openings are good enough. You can achieve good positions in openings such as the Elephant gambit (Philip Corbin has some really interesting games on this) and icelandic gambit. Occasionally I play the Fried Fox defense (e4 f6 d4 Kf7?!), even in tournaments with some success and Brussels gambit (e4 c5 Nf3 f5?!).
When I really have no idea, I just play the Nimzowitsch yt guide and hope I remember enough. Perhaps it's the "soundest" of my repertoire.
Yes. Playing against e4 is a pain.
Or basically any main first moves for white.
But I always remember that in good hands even the "weak" openings are good enough. You can achieve good positions in openings such as the Elephant gambit (Philip Corbin has some really interesting games on this) and icelandic gambit. Occasionally I play the Fried Fox defense (e4 f6 d4 Kf7?!), even in tournaments with some success and Brussels gambit (e4 c5 Nf3 f5?!).
When I really have no idea, I just play the Nimzowitsch yt guide and hope I remember enough. Perhaps it's the "soundest" of my repertoire.
I never heard about the Fried Fox Defence. Highly provocative and a huge chance that the opponent never saw it before.
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.
I guess white can force black to transpose to lines which begin with 1.e4 e5, or not?
New In Chess publisher has a book coming out next week that is about playing the Hanham Philidor and Old Indian when both black and white. https://www.newinchess.com/side-stepping-mainline-theory
Indeed. As I having been playing this game for awhile (like 30+ years) I too bounced around between DKP openings & Sicilians (Namely, the Najdorf!) and I'm also QP player as white. Indeed2 it's not a knock against you if you're taking time to find out what's best for you. You have a lifetime ahead of you soo dont be too concerned. The important thing is using that time to figure it out in practical play rather than always reading books. Playin's the thing, to me. Yes, I'm also a book player but I built my repertoire from the ups n downs of actual real time experience. Forget the wins and losses. Nonetheless, I play the CK on a practical basis and save my Sicilian play for special opponents (even though I played it exclusively for 6years OTB) online games. Play daily games more but get in some blitz. Other than that, have fun my friend! Best wishes😉