Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Only Chess Forum

Only Chess Forum

  1. 19 Sep '08 06:52
    It creates the most boringly dull games of chess I've ever played.
    My opening repertoire looks like this:
    As black, Latvian, Budapest, Halibut, From, accepts KG with 3.d6
    As white, Tennison, Lisitsin, Santasiere, Ponziani, and... French advance ¬_¬
    It's the one line that guarantees a positional struggle instead of any drawn out combinations and sacrifices. I cannot understand how anyone can find playing through that sort of game at all fun.

    It could be argued that this is the point. Black is good at positional play, so forces white into a positional game.
    Well in that case, black would win.

    If you only enjoy chess because it's something you can win, then by all means play the French, but I guess that's just not how I look at chess. I would much rather lose a game riddled with wild tactical shots than win a game through having a decent outpost that eventually came good after 50 moves.
  2. 19 Sep '08 07:13
    Originally posted by doodinthemood
    It creates the most boringly dull games of chess I've ever played.
    My opening repertoire looks like this:
    As black, Latvian, Budapest, Halibut, From, accepts KG with 3.d6
    As white, Tennison, Lisitsin, Santasiere, Ponziani, and... French advance ¬_¬
    It's the one line that guarantees a positional struggle instead of any drawn out combinations and sa ...[text shortened]... ts than win a game through having a decent outpost that eventually came good after 50 moves.
    I've never had a boring french game as white.... Never played it as black... In fact I don't think I've really had a boring game of chess ever but this could just be my explosive style... But I think as I get better I'll have to tone it down a bit.
  3. 19 Sep '08 07:17
    Originally posted by doodinthemood
    It creates the most boringly dull games of chess I've ever played.
    My opening repertoire looks like this:
    As black, Latvian, Budapest, Halibut, From, accepts KG with 3.d6
    As white, Tennison, Lisitsin, Santasiere, Ponziani, and... French advance ¬_¬
    It's the one line that guarantees a positional struggle instead of any drawn out combinations and sa ...[text shortened]... ts than win a game through having a decent outpost that eventually came good after 50 moves.
    Yes, the French creates "dull" positional struggles but not always. 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 Bb4 has a lot of life to it. There are other variations too. Eventually, you will run into 3. Nxe5 in the Latvian, as we all have, and end up saying I'm in a defensive position with equality but no real chances. White develops sensibly and opens up the game with f3, while black has a pawn on d6, bishop on e7, and no real chance for initiative. 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 ( No Budapest) also 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e5 3. d5 only equal but dull as heck once all the Ng4 or Bxf2 tactics are gone. Tennison 1. Nf3 d5 2. e4 dxe4 3. Ng5 e5 4. Nxe4 f5 5. Ng3 Bc5 and white can't even play Bc4 because of Bxf2+.
    Lisitsin (I'm playing a game with it now. You don't get half as much fun with it as you would over the board without books.) I've been where you are. Those openings are stepping stones. You learn a lot about tactics and play with the initiative. Eventually, though you play stronger players who know the nuances and get pounded. That's the real problem with those openings. They are good for learning, but you can't rely on them forever. Also, you can't make a game really tactical without help from the opponent. I was just trying to give some good solid reasons why the French may work for some players. A lot prefer the Sicilian or 1. e4 e5.
  4. 19 Sep '08 07:25
    You'd rather win through some trick than a well-thought out and executed plan? I feel the opposite. My guess is you just don't understand chess well enough to do anything against more positional openings and so you criticize those who play such positions.

    Moreover, different people like different kinds of positions and boring is very subjective. However, in the case of the French, it can be played by players of more direct attacking style or more restrained play like Bareev. What matters is what variations you choose.
  5. 19 Sep '08 12:23
    No, well thought out plan is the sort of chess I like. But I wouldn't consider "control of e5" to be a plan worthy of 20 moves.
    I can manage this. I have to be able to, because of the number of people that seem to like these positions, I just don't enjoy it as much as devoting 20 moves to end up forking something, or devoting 20 moves to checkmate the opponent in the middlegame.

    I don't criticize any player that likes positional chess, or plays the French, I just encourage players to aim for what they find fun over what they find works for them.

    A guy mentioned meeting 3.Nxe5.
    I experimented with two counters to this.
    On chessbase, I have a win percentage of 70% with Qf6,
    and a win percentage of 45% with Nc6.

    I always play the latter nowadays. One win out of the excitement that ensues after Nc6 Qh5+ would be worth 5 of the "fight for the centre" Qf6 wins.
  6. 19 Sep '08 13:22
    Quote:
    It [The French Defence] creates the most boringly dull games of
    chess I've ever played.

    Try not to label openings into dull & excitng.
    The sharpest gambits have all been analysed down to fruitless positions.
    That's why you very rarely see them at the top level.

    Even the London System can suddenly turn into a myriad of complications.

    Marshall, one of the greatest attacking players, played the
    French. Indeed, his 'gold coins' game was him as Black in a French.

    My advice in such cases is always the same.
    If you you are having trouble v an opening then play it yourself.
    Someone will play a move, or adopt a plan that triggers your
    imagination and there you are. You will have ideas next time you meet it.

    Inside every clown there is a serious actor trying to get out.
    Inside every tactical player there is a positional player trying to get out.

    The transition from tactical to positional is called maturing.

    I'm told it should be a natural progression... I'm still waiting.
    So I'll always be the Clown on the Chessboard (what a great title for chess book).

    OTB I out trick under 2000's - over that I useally get the pie in the face.
    But every now and then, even they would slip up on a banana skin
    and I'd bring down a big boy.

    So today's lesson is:

    Ignore what opening is being played, just enjoy your chess.
    You are playing the greatest game that was ever invented.
  7. 19 Sep '08 13:43 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by greenpawn34
    You are playing the greatest game that was ever invented.
    You've clearly never tried "hungry hungry hippos"
  8. 19 Sep '08 15:29
    boring chess players play boring chess openings.
    so don't blame it on the opening.
  9. 19 Sep '08 17:08
    Originally posted by doodinthemood
    You've clearly never tried "hungry hungry hippos"
    Chess is the second greatest game ever invented...
    ...after Hungy Hungry Hippos.
  10. 19 Sep '08 17:19
    Originally posted by greenpawn34
    Chess is the second greatest game ever invented...
    ...after Hungy Hungry Hippos.
    What is hungry hungry hippos?
  11. 19 Sep '08 17:38
    Originally posted by doodinthemood
    It creates the most boringly dull games of chess I've ever played.
    My opening repertoire looks like this:
    As black, Latvian, Budapest, Halibut, From, accepts KG with 3.d6
    As white, Tennison, Lisitsin, Santasiere, Ponziani, and... French advance ¬_¬
    It's the one line that guarantees a positional struggle instead of any drawn out combinations and sa ...[text shortened]... ts than win a game through having a decent outpost that eventually came good after 50 moves.
    forgive me, but the only reasonable thing this post suggests is that you have no idea about positional play.
  12. Standard member SwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    19 Sep '08 17:47
    Originally posted by greenpawn34
    Chess is the second greatest game ever invented...
    ...after Hungy Hungry Hippos.
    In that game, there always seemed to be one unlucky player with a not-so-hungry hippo - the one with a broken/jammed lever.
  13. 19 Sep '08 18:40
    Originally posted by SwissGambit
    In that game, there always seemed to be one unlucky player with a not-so-hungry hippo - the one with a broken/jammed lever.
    When I play there are alway three unlucky players with broken or jammed levers.... I am never one of the unlucky ones.
  14. Standard member SwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    19 Sep '08 21:18
    Originally posted by tomtom232
    When I play there are alway three unlucky players with broken or jammed levers.... I am never one of the unlucky ones.
    How sad is that if you have to rig the table just to win at Hungry Hippos?
  15. 20 Sep '08 13:18
    Originally posted by diskamyl
    forgive me, but the only reasonable thing this post suggests is that you have no idea about positional play.
    You are forgiven. My positional play is fine. I win more positional matches than tactical matches, but tactics are what make chess fun.

    I also thought of something to demonstrate that this is true for most chess players, and not just me:
    Chess puzzles. Find a chess puzzle that is "white to play and get better control of the dark squares over the next 5 moves" or "black to play and strengthen his support of e4 in 3". They don't exist. Puzzles are made to have nifty combinations. These can be long and drawn out; I've worked on mates in 10 and more in the past, but they're all tactical, because that's what makes chess fun for the majority of people.