Advise me; new opening
Sort:
NM
TheOldReb
Nov 18, 2007
0
#21
Where do you put your qb in the queens gambit? Try developing it to f4 if you tire of g5 , also in the main lines of queens gambit do you play exchange variation or not? I play the queens gambit and try several ways of playing it to keep it more interesting. Ever try the stonewall as white? Why dont you wanna play 1e4?
I have seen 1g3, followed by 2 Bg2 used successfully although I have yet to master it. I'm sure it has a name, but as I am just starting out, I have no idea what openings are called.
As far as I have used it, it conforms to the norms of gaining control over the centre sqaures, e4 & e5, but a reasonable degree of skillis then required tostop those early gains being lost.
What does anybody think?
Well the fianchetto formation (what you talk of Homer) is one of the intended results of the aforementioned King's Indian Attack. But moving the knight out first stops e5, and lets you be non-commital. Once that pawn is moved to g3 it is out there forever, while a knight can always be retreated.
1g3 is called Benko's opening , though it can transpose to various other openings...
I rarely take the pawn as white in the QG. Isn't it better to let black take? While black leaves it untaken I still have a nice central pawn formation. I do experiment with it to a certain extent; trying both queenside and kingside attacks.
The stonewall? You will have to enlighten me I'm afraid.
I always used to play e4, but I find that because so many people play it everybody already knows loads of traps. Furthermore, I can't stand four knights games.
Yep King's Indian Attack as mentioned earlier, or the reti which transposes into the KIA:
lochness, what game is that you've posted? It doesn't look like a KIA to me (wrong bishop is fianchettoed, pawn structure totally different).
White's play also look inconsistent to me. 4. d4?! blocking in the bishop on b2. And then black helps white out with 9. ... c5 allowing white to clear the diagonal. I'm not sure either side is handling their business very well in this game.
The problem as I see it is this balance between knights and bishops. I have won and lost games utilising both with the queen, so it is a bit of a conundrum. I have read that Fischer believes that if both players play the perfect game then a draw is inevitable, which I have to say I agree with as it concurs with my own experience.
I am playing a possible exception now, which is so tight it makes me wonder.
http://www.chess.com/echess/game.html?id=1213081
Please, no thoughts on the game itself as that would not be fair, but I post it merely to add to the debate.
That's fair enough Lord, but i always though the purpose of pawns was to leave them out there. The position is realtively solid from that perspective, but I feel the key is from there on in is controlling the centre squares.
If you're looking for a non-gambit system for white that doesn't start with 1. e4, how about the Colle? It's a 1. d4 opening that doesn't have 2. c4. I don't remember the exact moves since I haven't played it in years, but white plays 1. d4, then e3, Nf3, Bd3, 0-0, c3, Nd2, Re1, then eventually pushes the e pawn up to e4 once it's supported by everything white has. Generally, that leads to a trade of white's e4 pawn for black's d5 pawn, and then the game opens up and the attacking begins. Because it's really a system, it works against most black responses, although you do have to improvise against the weird stuff.
--Fromper
Fromper,
Your response begs the question as to why you haven't used it in years. If it was good, then you would use it, but you suggest that anything out of the ordinary leaves it exposed?
The Colle is a solid opening. But it's not exciting and there are many openings to choose from. Fromper isn't required to play every opening that is good. 
I'd advise against 1.g3 for a KIA opening move, 1.Nf3 is much better.
After 1.g3 e5, white's in a position I'm not too fond of.
Loomis wrote:
lochness, what game is that you've posted? It doesn't look like a KIA to me (wrong bishop is fianchettoed, pawn structure totally different).
White's play also look inconsistent to me. 4. d4?! blocking in the bishop on b2. And then black helps white out with 9. ... c5 allowing white to clear the diagonal. I'm not sure either side is handling their business very well in this game.
It is the Reti, Nimzowitsch - Larsen Attack
Do you mean this is an actual game between Nimzowitsch and Larsen? I've never seen this b3 move, where did you find this game?
Loomis wrote: Do you mean this is an actual game between Nimzowitsch and Larsen? I've never seen this b3 move, where did you find this game?
ECO A06 Reti: Nimzowitsch- Larsen 2...Bg4
A06 was a big help. I looked up a bunch of A06 games and in none of them do I see white playing d4 as you have shown on white's 4th move. The setup seems counterintuitive to me with Bb2 and d4. Do you have a reference to somebody playing it this way?
You got to look harder Loomis!
I learned it as part of my opening repetoire after seeing the variation in NCO.
Do a position search here:
http://www.chesslab.com/PositionSearch.html
Evil_Homer wrote:
Fromper,
Your response begs the question as to why you haven't used it in years. If it was good, then you would use it, but you suggest that anything out of the ordinary leaves it exposed?
How on earth does this beg the question? Do you know what it means for something to beg the question? It does not mean 'warrants the question,' as you seem to have used it. It means it uses circular logic, presupposing the point needing to be proven. Nothing about Fromper's comments seems to beg the question.
Evil_Homer wrote:
Fromper,
Your response begs the question as to why you haven't used it in years. If it was good, then you would use it, but you suggest that anything out of the ordinary leaves it exposed?
The Colle's a perfectly good opening. CJS Purdy, who was a far better chess player than I'll ever be, recommended it as a solid way for club players to get to a playable middle game consistantly without having to do too much opening study. If you're interested in his opinions on the opening, you can look at the book "Action Chess", which is a collection of his articles recommending an easy to learn opening repertoire, including the Colle System for white.
I chose to stop playing it because I decided that I needed to learn to attack more aggressively, so I switched to aggressive openings. First, I switched to playing 1. e4 and normal open games (Giuoco Piano, Scotch, Ruy Lopez, Vienna). Then, I switched to playing riskier gambits in the hopes of getting faster attacks. Then I got sick of playing against the Sicilian every time I had white, so I've recently taken up the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit as white (1. d4 d5 2. e4 dxe4 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. f3 exf3 5. Nxf3). I actually don't seem to be winning many games when my opponents play into the gambit, but when they avoid it, we end up in lines where I do well.
--Fromper