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

Only Chess Forum

  1. 13 Nov '06 00:18
    I'm a balanced player but hate playing without initiative or at least decent attacking prospects. I'm currently using the Queen's Indian(sometimes Bogo)/Nimzo Indian vs d4 but have found it sometimes too drawish. I'm considering the Grunfeld, but know next to nothing about it. How would you guys rate this opening? Is it sound? Any information is appreciated.
  2. Donation !~TONY~!
    1...c5!
    13 Nov '06 00:20
    It's definitely sound. It's very interesting, with black letting white set up a large center. Check out nearly every game Peter Svidler's played with black against 1. d4. I am pretty sure he is a Gruenfeld freak. He's had decent results in the latest tourney, I think the Tal memorial.
  3. 13 Nov '06 00:22
    Just play the Benko, black gets all the initiative
  4. Standard member DeepThought
    Losing the Thread
    13 Nov '06 00:41
    The Dutch is a good counter attacking opening against 1. d4 as long as you don't mind a few total catastrophes...
  5. 13 Nov '06 00:52
    Originally posted by DeepThought
    The Dutch is a good counter attacking opening against 1. d4 as long as you don't mind a few total catastrophes...
    Ha ha, indeed! I am having a lot of fun with it, but it can get very messy!
  6. Standard member Spacetime
    Not material
    13 Nov '06 01:27
    I like the Gruenfeld. If black manages to destroy the center he can usually win (at least in my limited experience). I'm thinking of trying the Benko if it gives black more initiative. Can somebody who's played both compare the Gruenfeld to the Benko for me?

    Thanks, I'm posting on forums instead of making moves tonight because of the good Wisconsin beer I'm drinking
  7. Donation !~TONY~!
    1...c5!
    13 Nov '06 01:50
    The Benko and the Grunfeld are definitely different. Obviously the Benko is a gambit, and black gives up a pawn. Second, the pawn structure in the Benko and the Grunfeld are pretty much as different as it can physically get. The one thing I like about the Benko is black has alot of great positional trumps to work with. He has 1 pawn island, two open files on the queenside, great dark square control, an outrageously strong bishop on g7, etc...
  8. 13 Nov '06 02:07
    I've analyzed the Benko and Bennoni but came to the conclusion that it's not for me at this time. Any other players I should watch for the Grunfeld?
  9. 13 Nov '06 02:08
    Originally posted by !~TONY~!
    The Benko and the Grunfeld are definitely different. Obviously the Benko is a gambit, and black gives up a pawn. Second, the pawn structure in the Benko and the Grunfeld are pretty much as different as it can physically get. The one thing I like about the Benko is black has alot of great positional trumps to work with. He has 1 pawn island, two open files on the queenside, great dark square control, an outrageously strong bishop on g7, etc...
    I love the Benko OTB but for correspondence chess I think a black gambit is dubious (although in most cases i think the gambit is declined now?). I would prefer the Modern Benoni, same sorts of positions with less tactical pitfalls.

    I hate the Grunfeld .. almost as much as i hate Alekhine's defense. But this is entirely a matter of taste, I just don't like breaking the centre, i prefer to fight for it from the start. It certainly isn't an opening for beginners as it requires strong defensive skills (although play it enough and you will learn all about good defense .. the hard way )
  10. Donation !~TONY~!
    1...c5!
    13 Nov '06 02:14
    I love the Benoni, but if you ask me the Benko is better, pawn down and all.
  11. 13 Nov '06 02:16
    Originally posted by exigentsky
    I've analyzed the Benko and Bennoni but came to the conclusion that it's not for me at this time. Any other players I should watch for the Grunfeld?
    Black holds the initiative in a lot of KI positions. My problem with KI is that it has a MOUNTAIN of theory required to play it well. If you like closed positions though it's certainly a rewarding opening.
  12. Donation !~TONY~!
    1...c5!
    13 Nov '06 02:33
    I love the KID. I used to play the Semi Slav and love that also, but I have switched the KID more recently looking for something a little different lately.
  13. 13 Nov '06 02:52 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by !~TONY~!
    I love the KID. I used to play the Semi Slav and love that also, but I have switched the KID more recently looking for something a little different lately.
    Its an addictive defense for the closed position lover. Its also a decent "anti-computer" opening as long as the engine doesn't have a huge book (some variations of KI are in books 30 moves deep! Try playing a blitz game against an opponent that doesn't need think time for the first 30 moves )
  14. Donation briancron
    nunquam perdo
    13 Nov '06 03:03
    This is an interesting article on this subject.

    http://www.jeremysilman.com/chess_instrctn_bgnrs/120603_crt_easy_op_rep_bk.html

    Silman is suggesting the QGD as a safe easy answer to d4 and he explains his reasoning.
  15. 13 Nov '06 03:48
    Originally posted by briancron
    This is an interesting article on this subject.

    http://www.jeremysilman.com/chess_instrctn_bgnrs/120603_crt_easy_op_rep_bk.html

    Silman is suggesting the QGD as a safe easy answer to d4 and he explains his reasoning.
    I forgot all about QGD .. I don't think I've played it in years. Very solid .. very dull