How to choose openings?

I know they say you should choose an opening that suits your style, but I don't even REALLY know my style yet. I like attacking chess, I like gambits (Not too much of a material sacrifice, say a pawn or too. Not the Danish or the Muzio gambit which are quite extreme.

I play the Sicilian (usually a Najdorf) against 1. e4, I like the usually sharp outcome of the opening.

I play the Slav Defense usually (sometimes the semi-slav against the Queen's gambit from white (although I would really like to learn the KID, I don't know if it fits my style, does it? I heard the Grunfeld is quite sharp too). 

I play the Italian game, Ruy Lopez and sometimes the King's gambit as white when I start with 1. e4. And the queen's gambit when I start with 1. d4, usually going for the Catalan when I can.

Any offers for sharp openings that I should look at? Gambits that are interesting?

I would offer a piece of helpful advice, but it seems you know a ton of openings already. 

Mind if I ask what your playing strength is.

It's hard to trust the reliability of somebody who lists three e4 openings, all of which need the reply e5.

How to choose openings? Try one, if you don't take a quick disliking to it stick with it for a while.

ChessOath wrote:

Tzah123 wrote:

I play the Italian game, Ruy Lopez and sometimes the King's gambit as white when I start with 1. e4.

It's hard to trust the reliability of somebody who lists three e4 openings, all of which need the reply e5.

How to choose openings? Try one, if you don't take a quick disliking to it stick with it for a while.

When white responds with the Scandinavian I take, when faced with the Sicilian I play the Sozin-Fischer (Bc4), usually followed by Be3 and castling queenside.

Against the French I play the Winawoer variation (Nc3, Bb4. e5, c5.)

Against Alekhine's defense I either push the pawn (e5) or when I feel like, transpose into a Vienna game.

Is that enough opening?

What?!? You've given a few very specific example of opening lines that Black has to co-operate in... The Winawer... The Fischer-Sozin Attack!?! How specific is that? I hadn't even heard of it... Also, you mention the Alekhine's and the Scandinavian but not the CK but to be honest i still can't get past this:

"When I face the Sicilian I play the Sozin-Fischer..."

Words fail me...

Pick a solid, easy-to-play opening. Go for the statistics: which will give you higher winning and drawing chances? For example, the Sicilian (1. ... c5) is the opening that gives Black the highest winning chances. If you're White, you should probably consider the Two Knights (or Four Knights, depending on how Black plays). If White tries the Queen's Gambit, just play the Semi-Slav. This should cover already most possibilities, and all these openings are quite solid.

ChessOath wrote:

Tzah123 wrote:

When white responds with the Scandinavian I take, when faced with the Sicilian I play the Sozin-Fischer (Bc4), usually followed by Be3 and castling queenside.

Against the French I play the Winawoer variation (Nc3, Bb4. e5, c5.)

Against Alekhine's defense I either push the pawn (e5) or when I feel like, transpose into a Vienna game.

Is that enough opening?

What?!? You've given a few very specific example of opening lines that Black has to co-operate in... The Winawer... The Fischer-Sozin Attack!?! How specific is that? I hadn't even heard of it... Also, you mention the Alekhine's and the Scandinavian but not the CK but to be honest i still can't get past this:

"When I face the Sicilian I play the Sozin-Fischer..."

Words fail me...

Very specific? Both sides usually play these lines. Against the Caro-kann I go into the main line (e4, c3. d4, d5. Nc3, dxe4. Nxe4 ...). These are all specific because these ARE the lines of the openings

...

1. You dont have a style.

2. Everyone at your level thinks they are an "attacking"/"agressive" player.

3. Any opening can be "sharp"..."agressive"..."attacking"  

4. If you dont underdtand any or all of the above I would suggest that you do learn, and understand 1-3

The openings you should choose will depend on your ultimate goal... your overall purpose.

If your goal is to improve, then choose something the follows classic principals and then quickly forget about openings. You'll be busy for at least a few years collecting all the basics. Play over master games that use the opening you chose and check your games vs a database, but don't sit at home memorizing lots of variations.

Mostly you need to learn tactics, strategy, endgames, and how to analyze. Most of your games will be decided in the middlegame based on how well each player was able to analyze.

---

If you want to play for fun or tricks, or a high win% against lower rated players, then sure, it's probably good to choose various gambits and wild lines, then memorize a lot of variations. Strong players will never go into any of those variations, but you'll get a lot of quick wins against players who don't know any better.

When I first began developing an opening repertoire I simply copied the repertoire of my favorite player , Fischer . So , I played 1 e4 as white and as black tried playing the najdorf sicilian against 1 e4 and the KID or the Gruenfeld against 1 d4 . ( KID much more frequently )  Many tourney players I knew then ( 70s ) developed their repertoire in the same way .  Ofcourse , soon I had to start changing , almost right away !  I was terrible on the black side of the najdorf ( 1200 player  )  and was being crushed almost every game so I changed to Alekhines 1... Nf6 which served me well up to 1800 level .  Over the years I dropped certain openings and added new ones to suit my strengths/weaknesses/style   and basically tried to get into positions that I liked playing and/or had success in .  Now , more than 40 years later the only openings I still play that were 2 of Bobby's favorites are the Ruy and the KID . 

ВОТ ШТО ЗНАЧИТ ОКУНУУТСЯ В НАСТОЯЩЕЕ АМЕРО ГОВНО! С ДНЕМ РОЖДЕНИЯ РОДНОЙ. СС КОМЧ. ЧЕСС КОМ С ПРАЗДНИКОМ!! РОССИЯ ИСТРЕБИЛА ЛУТЬШИЙ ЦВЕТ СВОЕЙ ЗЕМЛИ ,И В ЭТОГЕ НА МИЛИИ ОКАЗАЛАСЯА ХОЧЕШ ЖМИ А ХОЧЕШЬ КУЙ ,ВСЕ РАВНО ПОЛУЧИШЬ ХУЙ А ШТО НА РУБЬ НЫНЧЕ КУПИШЬ?ТОЛЬКО КУКИШЬ! ТРАТТА ТАТАТАА ТРОЛЛЯ ЛЯ ЛЯЛЯ ТРОООЛЮШКИ ТРОЛЛЕЙ В ЧАТЕ РАЗВЕЛООСЬ!РЫБКА ГУППИ ГУППИ ЕСТЬ РЫБКА ТАКАЯ В СТРАНЕ ДУРАКОВ РОССИИ!! OBAMA? [removed -- MOD] YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ПРЫХ СКОК МУХА МУХА МУХА ААААААААААА ПРЫХ СКОК МУМУМУХА// КОНЬ Ф З/ ДЕБЮТ РЕТИ И КРАИНИЕ ПЕШКИ!!!! ЛЕПОТА В НОЧИ ЛЕПОТА В ЛЮЧИ! ЕЛЬЦИН БОРЯ ПЬЯН ХОТЬ ХУЙ ОБАМОВСКИЙ СОСИИ

HI VERE GUD FOTO 🚱🚱🚱🚱🚱👑👑👑👗👗👙👙👙👙👙👙👙👙👙💰💰💰💰💰👛👛💰💰💰👛👛👛💰💰💰👛👛👛💰💰💰💰👛👛👛💰💰CHESS.COM MANI MANI

Diakonia wrote:

Tzah123 wrote:

I know they say you should choose an opening that suits your style, but I don't even REALLY know my style yet. I like attacking chess, I like gambits (Not too much of a material sacrifice, say a pawn or too. Not the Danish or the Muzio gambit which are quite extreme.

I play the Sicilian (usually a Najdorf) against 1. e4, I like the usually sharp outcome of the opening.

I play the Slav Defense usually (sometimes the semi-slav against the Queen's gambit from white (although I would really like to learn the KID, I don't know if it fits my style, does it? I heard the Grunfeld is quite sharp too). 

I play the Italian game, Ruy Lopez and sometimes the King's gambit as white when I start with 1. e4. And the queen's gambit when I start with 1. d4, usually going for the Catalan when I can.

Any offers for sharp openings that I should look at? Gambits that are interesting?

1. You dont have a style.

2. Everyone at your level thinks they are an "attacking"/"agressive" player.

3. Any opening can be "sharp"..."agressive"..."attacking"  

4. If you dont underdtand any or all of the above I would suggest that you do learn, and understand 1-3

1. I might not have a style, but I strive to have one, that's the first step.

2. This is the only thing I can't really comment on. True that.

3. It might in some variations but certain openings almost always lead to extremely sharp middle games like in the Tarrasch or the Sicilian

Reb wrote:

When I first began developing an opening repertoire I simply copied the repertoire of my favorite player , Fischer . So , I played 1 e4 as white and as black tried playing the najdorf sicilian against 1 e4 and the KID or the Gruenfeld against 1 d4 . ( KID much more frequently )  Many tourney players I knew then ( 70s ) developed their repertoire in the same way .  Ofcourse , soon I had to start changing , almost right away !  I was terrible on the black side of the najdorf ( 1200 player  )  and was being crushed almost every game so I changed to Alekhines 1... Nf6 which served me well up to 1800 level .  Over the years I dropped certain openings and added new ones to suit my strengths/weaknesses/style   and basically tried to get into positions that I liked playing and/or had success in .  Now , more than 40 years later the only openings I still play that were 2 of Bobby's favorites are the Ruy and the KID . 

I think I'm going to try to stick to this one. Kasparov it is. Sicilian and Evans Gambit in my 1. e4 repertoire

why gotta be so harsh and rude to everyone slightly lower rated than you.

What some consider "rude" I call honesty.  If you need to be coddled then so be it.  I dont sugar coat things.  

The OP doesnt have a style.  Fact

Every beginner thinks they are agressive at some point. Fact

Any opening can be sharp, agressive, attackingl.  Fact

#4 - Fact.

Is it honest and factual to take up subjects that are a matter of degree and write as if someone is 100% wrong about them?

"It would be nice to start the construction of an opening repertoire from scratch. ... The first step is to think about your personal style. Do you prefer open, tactical positions or closed, strategic positions? Does an attack on your king make you nervous, or are you happy so long as you have a counter-attack? Do you prefer main lines, or something slightly offbeat? Next, look at the various openings available, and see which ones fit in with your personal style. ..." - GM John Nunn (2006)

"Each player should choose an opening that attracts him. Some players are looking for a gambit as White, others for Black gambits. Many players that are starting out (or have bad memories) want to avoid mainstream systems, others want dynamic openings, and others want calm positional pathways. It’s all about personal taste and personal need.

For example, if you feel you’re poor at tactics you can choose a quiet positional opening (trying to hide from your weakness and just play chess), or seek more dynamic openings that engender lots of tactics and sacrifices (this might lead to more losses but, over time, will improve your tactical skills and make you stronger)." - IM Jeremy Silman (January 28, 2016)