You want to open but encounter premature attacks

 This happens all the time. I'm trying an opening and not looking to engage for maybe 10 moves or so, but before a full opening on either side can occur, the opponent is already attacking. Of course by then I'm already engaged in trading pieces and fighting for better position but it always feels like I'm not learning anything new, in regard to development and this makes me ask....how should I view this occurence? and what can I do to still learn the openings while being forced to engage so early in each game? PS- I guess I've been guilty of this too (premature attacking) but I find it more interesting to be fully developed before battling. Suggestions/criticism/advice are all welcome. Thanks in advance-

If it's premature, then by definition there should be some tactical or strategic refutation. If he isn't well enough developed the attack shouldn't succeed. I fear it's not the sort of question that can be well answered with generalities though.

Assuming you didn't go out of book...

If your preparation is good, then when your opponent goes into suboptimal lines, then logically it should be you at an advantage, unless it is you who are less prepared, and you are just encountering some line or novelty that you haven't prepared for.  You should neither scoff at it, nor harbor negative reactions, but welcome it, because 2 main things can happen:

1) you learn a new line in your favorite opening

2) your better preparation makes him pay for a bad idea

Either way, you come out with something :)

Some openings do lead to early exchanges. If that is a problem for you try to play something less sharp. If we're talking real mistakes you didn't pick up on, we're going to need to see the game of course.

Exactly what I was thinking.

It does remind me of a story, though. A well known chess writer, I can't remember who, wrote annotations for 2 games which were identical up to move 10 or 12.

At that point, White played a e5 pawn break in both games. White won one, and lost one.

For the first game, the annotation read: a well timed advance

For the second: a premature thrust...

Is anyone else thinking what I'm thinking?

History belongs to the winners :-)

Well, at least Oli is :)

I didn't until you pointed it out. Had he written "bitter" instead I probably would.

Anyways, as others already said, either the early attack is a mistake by your opponent which you should punish or you made a mistake before the attack that gave him that opportunity.

Also, would that be StarCraft I'd suggest looking for "20 minutes norush" games. But in online-chess 20 minutes probably wouldn't be enough to be "ready" with the opening.

@Franquis:

I think you already made clear how to deal with premature attacks. You don't need any help , you already know it.

About it becoming boring punishing your opponents for doing so , I can say I partially agree.

But , if you say that the battle is already won and it's not interesting anymore. That technique will finish him off and you're only hope is that he is a good player and will resign shortly . Then I fully agree.

If you can succesfully withstand these early attacks , you showed you understand the opening (or defense) at hand . If your opening or position is sound , it can withstand any ( esp. foolish) attack.

@olichris said:

I assume my compatriot is being serious, .......

Ben jij Nederlander ? If not , how do (did) you deduce that we are compatriots , in this case English ?

If you weren't talking about me , then I feel like an idiot . I always feel like an idiot , but please ask me why.

That's how nature works : The winners are the fittest of the survivors.

I have to admit that I somewhat misinterpreted the title of OP's thread. I was thinking about attacks that happen before the start of a game , before making a single move.

I think this thread deals with a very interesting subject and OP's intoduction post makes a lot of sense. I hope no-one dares to troll a good thread like this , so you won't be seeing much of me.

I will however keep and eye on this thread , just to see if things go by the rules. I wan't to slime my way up in chess.com society you know , I want to become a Spider. I want people to look up to me. I'm no longer one of you. Not "one of the ladds" nomore.

A first? (just kidding, just kidding).

Maybe 10 moves in the opening is a lot.... better to have said 7-8? Anyway, I'm trying to acheive an opening where both sides are developed and sizing each other up before going in for exchanges... maybe that's not possible (?) but either way... I'll have to go with the flow and adjust/learn/be ready with a response.... as far as chess principles go, it says to develop all your pieces before you begin trading and it seems that it never happens. I bet I'm slightly delusional as well in thinking the fight starts too soon.... some good points and thanks Samir with the helpful outlook and will try Pengola's advice on "Its much more difficult for the opponent to make something out of a slow buring position such as those which arise from the Colle System for example." 

What about adopting the Kings Indian Attack with white?  It seems like a solid system that fits what you are looking for in an opening system.  Plus it's more ambitious than the Colle.  

@Franquis:

A nice opening with White , I think , is the Kings Indian Attack. It is very flexible and you can reach it from practically any of Black's opening moves. Even the great Fischer used it on and off. There is (hardly) no contact in the initial stage , but it will (can) soon transpose into many different lines most of which are pretty tactical and need manoeuvering skills. You are basically building-up for a decisive attack on the Black King. There is little theory about it.

Lately I viewed an article on that opening on YouTube and if you want , I can send you the link(s)

PS : Sorry Fixingahole: I didn't read your post. You just beat me to it. Two people , two thoughts at the same time.

Great minds think alike, eh?  

Sounds good, guys. It's about time I branch out and try new things and yes, Pelly, send the links if you will.

You might try some of the matches in which the opening is set in advance and play starts with the first few book moves already made.  People playing such games are like you - interested in finding something out about the opening. They will almost certainly look up (or already know) at least the main line so you are less likely to encounter the all out attack approach that you dislike.

That said I suspect you are losing out a bit by indulging this wish for games to follow some sort of pre-ordained early course. When your opponent makes a move that looks a bit outlandish your task is to come up with a good response. The process of working out which squares the odd looking move weakens and how to reorganise your opening so as to apply pressure at the right points is central to what well organised opening play is all about. Sticking rigidly to opening principles and failing to take full, or any, account of what your opponent is doing has some merit while you are learning the game but once you are an improver the chance to think out new positions while opening can, I suggest, be welcomed. In fact you can only claim to know a particular opening if you have a working knowledge of how to deal with early moves which depart from the book. When an early departure leaves you lost it means you haven't understood the principles at work in that opening.

If you are unpersuaded by that argument, an opening for white which allows you to make pretty much the same ten or twelve first moves almost whatever black does is the Colle. The basic ideas of that opening are easily understood and at anything less than master level it will get you a good game. If you encounter any all out attack which forces you to abandon your opening plan playing the Colle let me know. I have played it off and on for 50 years and the only thing I have come across in that time that persuades me to abandon it is the Dutch defence.