![]() ![]() But maybe it's the right choice for you, if you vibe with the positions. The Slav for example is very theory-heavy. In my opinion you shouldn't sort openings by their theory-heaviness but by their similarity to your playstyle. Even if objectively slightly dubious, it's still quite a practical choice at lower elos. It's basic game theory, if white players only face some opening 1% of the time, but they see 1.e5 and 1.c5 in 80-90% of their games, which one are they going to focus analyzing? No one will know theory past move 10, most people will be out of book by move 5. ![]() It's much easier to achieve in an unpopular opening that white players don't study too much. Unless your goal is to become IM/GM, you only need to know the same or slightly more theory than your opponent. But I'd suggest one of the less popular black openings. Alekhine's defense and Scandi might be similar, though I never played them. Personally I had very good results with the french with very little theory, and not too much variability. With black against e4, maybe avoid 1.e5 and 1.c5 if you don't want to study loads of theory, since white has so many options. It's more strategic and less tactical, you just need to know the basic ideas, not memorizing hundreds of lines of theory. stonewall dutch against d4, you can pretty much always play with the same structure every game regardless of what white does, and I'd wager most white players don't know the theory very well. I disagree, but you need separate ones as black against e4 and d4. I think this also doesn't work out as well when people are legitimately good at chess, but that's not most of us. ![]() You don't like someone's defense? You can always switch to a KIA and not be obviously worse and then just play chess. Obviously it's not a system-type opening or defense, but you can get the set up and go from there. d4, if I play (whatever defense), there's almost always going to be decent flexibility where some divergence from theory after 5-10 moves isn't going to be too bad, regardless of an indian system, a slav/semi-slav, and you can do that against d4/c4/Nf3 with reasonable symmetry. I lose with black not because white was booked up or my opening was suspect but because I suck at chess and can't convert a good position/pressure where I should in the middle game. Even if we assume black is fighting to equalize, playing generally sound moves is probably okay and then going from there. I think for most people below titled players, the idea that black is fighting to equalize doesn't really matter. Please continue to give us your feedback and suggestions on how we can help make /r/chess better for everyone. Use the message the moderators link if your posts or comments don't appear, or for help with any administrative matters. Twitter/Facebook posts must contain a direct link to the tweet/post, and include the author's nameĬhess Spoiler format for problem answers etc., Public Moderator Logs (broken by API changes)ĭon’t engage in abusive, discriminatory, or bigoted behavior.ĭon't ask for advice about ongoing games.ĭo not use /r/chess exclusively to promote your own content. Instructions for /r/chess PGN addon ( Chrome, Firefox) News Puzzles Games Strategy Twitch Other Resources ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |