Why Do Some Players Do Better With Black ?

I recall Korchnoi saying something like his record with black was something like at least that with white. A club mate of mine who once hit around 210 ECF or thereabouts, said he found after one season he was doing far better with black.

Why is this ? I offer an extremely tentative reason that I expect to be challenged, but hope it may spark discussion: In the example above both players are or were very aggressive. Is it that too much aggression with white backfires, but aggression with black is useful.

Karpov I read somewhere was a big hitter with white but more subdued as black. I think we tend to think of Karpov has not really being overly aggressive don't we ?

Thoughts folks...

I struggle with this ever since I started.  I don't play on this site too much anymore. But I'd say for every win as white I have 4 as black. For me black takes the guess work out. White chooses the road and I just drive down it. No pressure. As white I feel this odd pressure to get a win, now it's to the point of it's a thing. I rather play black every game. It's so odd. As black I try to play aggressive trying for a reverse QG. AND as white I rather play reversed defense. Semi Slav/ colle.   The day someone invents a way to force a reversed French I'd fall in love playing the white side. I hate moving first. 

Calm, Agressive, Positional players can take advantage of their opponent's weaknesses and tend to think logically and analytically about a move rather than automatically assuming it is useful. White usually has the initiative, and if he plays too agressively black can take advantage of those positional weaknesses.

In over the board chess I perform better with black. I think that's because I tend to like positions where white has sacrificed material for pressure, as my defensive skills are quite good. As white you can often go all out for a win as you feel like you have to win since you moved first. Hence there is more psychological pressure when playing white.

Psychology.  Sometimes playing with white you feel like you have to win whereas black might play more solidly and with less expectation of getting a result.  This can cause white to overpress and allow black to take advantage

I play better as Black because I know the lines and plans better(I'm lazy).  As Black, I only face about 4 main opening moves.  As White, I have to learn lines for 8 good defenses, not to mention the many variations.  This means that I play a system which just gets me to a playable middlegame, but not one where a maintain the advantage.

The good thing about this system is that I can play the first dozen moves without thinking.  The bad thing is that I am easy to predict.  I play in a local tournament every year, and in the beginning I always placed first or second.  Now they research my games and find holes to exploit.

It's a Petrosian thing sometimes. He loved playing a passive game, only to lull his opponent into an attack, a game in which Petrosian had already scoped out his opponents' positional weaknesses that were prey to a counterattack. I, too, enjoy such play.

Maybe white makes the first move, but black is actually the one that chooses the opening, so black can steer the opening to more comfortable ground based on their style...when I first started I was much better with black...I think it was also because it made me think about responding to the other player's moves more.

I tend to do better as black compared to white. I don't like to be as aggressive as white kinda is

I win most of the time with White but have been awful with Black. I think it was (hopefully that will change) because I went on too much of an ego trip and thought I could enter into the most complicated versions of the Sicilian and French and win - even though I never studied tactics enough.  It would enter five round OTB tounaments and go 2-3 losing all my Black games. In my last completed rated games here, I'm 4-1 with White (loss by blunder) and 1-2 with Black and a pawn up with Black in a current game.  So hopefully, I'm turning it around a little.  I'm learning that I do have to be more aggressive with Black and not let myself get too cramped for space while not launching into attack-mode when I'm behind in development.

In lower level games, whites 1st move advantage become disadvantage. White makes the 1st mistake 😊

Psychology. I am more aware with the black pieces, looking for a chance to counter-attack.
As white I can face openings such as Ruy Lopez, Pirc, Alekhine, Caro-Kann, French, Sicilian.
As black (against e4) it is what variation do you plan against the Najdorf.

I think it has to do with the intrinsic nature of chess. By that, I mean that any move has both strengths and weaknesses. For example, 1.e4 gives positional chances to both sides. The white side is obvious and much discussed, but consider the black side as well

White has made his king position more exposed (however temporary that may be). He has given Black a vast number of ways to respond and guide the game's strategy. He has made certain strategic commitments that he cannot reverse.

I guess, in a way, it is an analogy to Newton's third law: namely, that for every good move there is an equal and opposite good response.

Just a thought...

Many players work twice as hard on their Black repertoire than on their White.

It's the opposite.I suck with black lately in OTB.SUCK MEANS SUCK! Suck so much. AHHH if that happens anymore my rating!!!!!!!!!!

I win just as easy with white as with black. It doesnt matters so much to me. So in a team I Always offer to play with black because some others really prefere having white.

Someone mentioned on another thread that there was a modern trend amongst the elite players to play sub optimal opening as white now in order to get positions they were familiar with. Perhaps this has been what black had been doing for quite some time and white is just catching up.