How far can you go with a limited repetoire?

Kasparov played both e4 and d4 regularly, he did not prefer one or the other. My question is, why is Kasparov listed under notable practitioners of the French exchange. 

A narrow repertoire is a smart thing, in my opinion. Specialization leads to mastery.

As Bruce Lee said: "I fear not the man who has practiced 10,000 kicks once — I fear the man who has practiced one kick 10,000 times."

I think people who are just learning to drive should try to go 300 kilometers per hour, just like Lewis Hamilton! After all, he's a World Champion Formula One driver... he should know how to drive better than any dumb driving instructor who has probably never won a major race in their life!

I did not say he did not play e4. Just that he played d4, French exchange how many of those did he play 2

I've told this story before, but we have a new crop of munchkins on the forum, and I expect that most of them haven't heard it yet.

The scene: the Canadian Open Chess Championship, Montreal, 1974. The field included everyone from GMs to patzers. I was one of the patzers, rated at the time around 1700. GM Lyubujevic eventually won the event, but a lot of muddy water went under the bridge before that happened.

In one of the middle rounds of the event, I happened to be looking at a neighboring board when one of the players blundered his Queen away. He resigned immediately, spoke a few civil words to his opponent, then headed for the exit. His opponent stayed in the playing hall for a few minutes, looking at the games on the upper boards, then he too headed for the door.

As he drew near the exit, his former opponent leaped out from behind a potted plant, kicked him in the balls, then ran out of the playing hall.

The Police were summoned, and they spent a few minutes talking to the injured player and to the Tournament Director. Then they retired to an inconspicuous spot at the side of the playing hall, and settled down to wait.

Sure enough, the offending player showed up for his next round pairing, was immediately arrested and dragged away by the Police.

The moral of the story... errr... I'm not sure. Don't kick people in the balls at a chess tournament in Canada?

<Joined 1 hour ago>

Just imagine how unbelievably bad every other chess player in the world must have been, to allow a retarded monkey to beat them all and take the World Chess Championship...

Another easy block to end the day!

👍 

Why do I always see you in the Forums advertising chessmood? 

I don't see any variety in the courses. 

I would like to have more than 1 repertoire with white and black, that too based somewhat offbeat lines. 

Fischer had his name attached to one two openings, Magnus Carlsen to one, Kasparov to none. You don't honestly need more than 1 opening against e4, d4, and as white to have successful career. 

Hey! Don't give my opening away!

With a limited repertoire you can go as far as top 10 in the world (Provided your openings are completely sound and you know them well) . The likes of MVL and Nepo exclusively plays Najdorf and Grunfeld with black( Both openings could lead to razer sharp positions where there could be targeted computer prep against them) .Yet both of them are currently doing "OK" (No 4 & No 5 in the world)

How far one can go with a limited repertoire depends on the repertoire itself.  Playing just the London System as White will stunt your growth in chess because 99.99999% of London players below the GM level do not actually understand the London, and only play it because the first 8 or so moves are the same (to them - the best moves are not the same - they merely play based on 10 percent of the actual system), and see it as a cheap way to the middle game.

This WILL stunt your growth!

If all you play your whole life is the Najdorf or French against 1.e4, there is so much diversity in the position that you could go your whole life with it, no problem at all.

Notice I said Najdorf, not Najdorf with 11...h6, or some other specific line.

I play the French, not the French Winawer Poisoned.  I play 7...Qc7, 7...O-O, 7...Kf8, 7...Nf5, McCutchen, Classical/Alekhine-Chatard/Steinitz, and Rubinstein against 3.Nc3.  Various lines against 3.Nd2.  Etc.  It is one opening, but you can highly diversify in openings like the French or Najdorf that you cannot do in something like the London System.

So it highly depends.

I play 1.d4 but maybe English (sometimes c4 second) When faced with d4 I play nf6 almost always When faced with a boring 1.e4 loser well guess.

Pretty far, it seems like.

I've been reading about Karpov who didn't seem to have a large repertoire. Early on he played the Ruy Lopez with both colours, and avoided the open sicilian until he was a master. Nakamura played and recommends a lot of straight forward stuff like the Scotch 4 knights and grand prix attack until quite a strong player.

But what if you wanted to play something else other than the exchange caro, and the Bd3 French. 

So I guess the rest of the world must be a beginner when Botvinnik became world champion. The two leaders of the Candidates, play nothing but the Sicilian and the Grunfeld, and e4 with white, I guess they are beginners to, right?