What about the Maroczy, I've always found myself at a small disadvantage as black when I use the Sicilian Dragon.
Also, I'm definitely a class player, maybe Class C. I usually play positional games and have success a lot of times with the KIA, but I'm not sure if that's really my strength or the best approach. It's just how I started playing.
So you guys don't think there is anything wrong with going for a repertoire based around E4, like the book I want to buy suggests?
Originally posted by exigentskyOf course not.
What about the Maroczy, I've always found myself at a small disadvantage as black when I use the Sicilian Dragon.
Also, I'm definitely a class player, maybe Class C. I usually play positional games and have success a lot of times with the KIA, but I'm not sure if that's really my strength or the best approach. It's just how I started playing.
S ...[text shortened]... nything wrong with going for a repertoire based around E4, like the book I want to buy suggests?
Regarding, e4 or d4. In all deference to Berliner, you could argue that e4 is better because it releases two pieces, which in turn will accelerate kingside castling. I don't think there's much difference. As an e4 player, you've got to know white side of sicilan, cause that's mostly what you'll run up against, in correspondence and over the board. As an e4 player you have to consider the king's indian, or nimzo, or queen's gambit and its myriad variations. So it all comes down to, play what your most comfortable with. Don't play what some book tells you or your friend suggests simply because it's based on their comfort zone. I didn't buy the Lev Alburt book of a black repertoire because I looked through it and say he recs the accelerated dragon. I don't like dragons, accelerated or slowed down, so I didn't buy it. I hear he's coming out with a white repertoire book, but i don't know what he's suggesting there. Another book out is The Chess Advantage by Larry Kaufman. I'm not thrilled with that because he recs the Spanish Exchange Variation, which I'm not thrilled about. You really have to work through your repertoire yourself to see what works with your own skills.
Originally posted by exigentskyi think this is interesting ....
I was looking through various chess databases (Gensunasumus, Shredder, ChessBase, etc.) and consistently it seems that E4 is no longer the highest percentage move for white. It is slightly inferior in performance to D4. Why is this?
i imagine it is very different for computers than for humans.
my guess is this ... d4 requires stategic defense by black rather than tactical defense as against e4 ... and so the computer is more likely to off balance a black computer opponent using d4.
i would bet that in computer v human play the computer comes off better in e4 games regardless of whether they play the black side or the white side.
Originally posted by exigentskyThere is an institute called known as the grandmaster guide to opening news, who answer your question in every book they publish regarding the games played recently in the world. obscure or insignificant tournamants or game-play are not entered. Each opening and variant has its 'scoring' statistics.
I was looking through various chess databases (Gensunasumus, Shredder, ChessBase, etc.) and consistently it seems that E4 is no longer the highest percentage move for white. It is slightly inferior in performance to D4. Why is this?
p.e. When the position is arised in the Uogele Variation in the Accelarated sicilian dragen (for people who don't know this variation: 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cd: 4. Nd4: g6 5. Nc3 Bg7 6. Be3 Nf6 7. Bc4 O-O 8. Bb3 a5!? ) played first in 1967 by Anicetas Uogele, nowdays adapted by many players as good but practice and theory are evolving rapidly, novelties come and go. but the scoreing is the following:
There are 493 games in their database:
In 242 games : variation 9. f3 d5 was played & scored 49,1% for white
In 179 games : variation 9 a4 was played & scored 56,4% for white
In 32 games : variation 9. O-O was played & scored 70,3% for white
Looking at the starting position the following statistics show up:
There are 708505 games in the database white scores 54,9%
In 287656 games : 1. d4 scores 56,1 % for white
In 337963 games : 1. e4 scores 54,2 % for white
In 140640 games : SI scores 52,3% for white
Their conclusion:
1. d4: BEST BY TEST
White's score is 54,9%. Of white's two main opening moves 1.d4 scores significantly better than 1. e4
The main culprit responsible for this state of affairs is the Scores gathered by the black players of the Sicilian defence.
hope this answers your question.
like people have said before, its just a matter of taste.
i'm an e4 player, and i greatly enjoy playing against the sicilian. i feel white enjoys many advantages, especially in the dragon (both accelerated and otherwise). however, thats only my view.
also, some of you said that d4 scores around 50 some percent. does that percentage include draws? jw
Originally posted by darkassassin9512yes includes wins, losses and DRAWS. But I agree its just a matter of taste and comfort with the opening and your style and preferance. But learn to play both of them and change with black openings; strengths your skills as a chess player. The Ideas and tactics/strategy of an opening is more important than the actual move in a book. If you understand the tactics/strategy of an opening you can play the opening moves without studying the moves boldly.
like people have said before, its just a matter of taste.
i'm an e4 player, and i greatly enjoy playing against the sicilian. i feel white enjoys many advantages, especially in the dragon (both accelerated and otherwise). however, thats only my view.
also, some of you said that d4 scores around 50 some percent. does that percentage include draws? jw
I prefer 1. e4 2, and I even like 2 play against sicilian players, someone said onces. "playing chess without being able to play sicilian isn't playing chess at all".
I also think much of the reason of white's lower advantage in e4 is that e4 theory is more highly developed than d4. that is to say the ruy lopez and giuco piano and KG such are rarely innovated upon. except the sicilian but even in the sicilian there are very few GMs have not explored. when watching GM games i notice e4 leads to about 20 blitzed opening moves whereas with d4 maybe only 14 or 15 moves are blitzed out before they start to think. i think that as theory develops it becomes easier for black to equalize which is what happens with e4, (again im talking about slighty more so than with d4)
that being said i still feel that e4 is simply a better move than d4 but i still play d4 maybe 30pc of the time. i feel e4 is better because it disallows indian and fianchetto openings (by disallow i mean GMs can beat someone playing the pirc or modern defense.) however with d4 the fianchettoing on both kside and qside is possible and maybe the best reply. i play gruenfeld for example and its amazing how much counterplay black can get. that being said the d4 prevents the sicilian, but the dragon kinda sucks and most other sicilian openings are an attempt by black to say, i can defend your attack and will come out on top with better pawn structure. that might work at the GM level, but i really feel that that is not the way to for lower class players to play. just castle queenside against the sicilian and youll be fine, i probably score like 60% against the sicilian, and its lots of fun.
In looking at statistics you also have to bear in mind the relative strength of the players involved. For many years 1.d4 was more popular among top GMs, though in recent years the tide has turned somewhat in the favour of 1.e4. It's also interesting that 1.c4 scores less well than 1.e4 or 1.d4, even though 1.c4 often in practice transposes to QP games.
It is true that statistically the Sicilian scores best against 1.e4, but I would hesitate to say it is objectively better than other openings. I think the practical problem from the white point of view is that although open Sicilians (2.Nf3 and 3.d4) are probably objectively strongest, there is simply so much theory to know for all the myriad Sicilian Defences, that many players are in practice tempted by the various anti-Sicilians, even though few of them cause black any real difficulties. I, for example, probably play as white about 66% Open Sicilians OTB and maybe 95% Open Sicilians on RHP where I can look up the theory if necessary.
maybe not irrelevant, but if you miss 'the correct move' when opponent goes off book by larger margin than the advantage of a 'best by test' opening, it's all pretty academic. and that margin must be very slim, a fraction of a pawn, otherwise GMs would score 100%.
also, choosing an opening against your personal strengths might not be very wise, no matter how it scores statistically.