I have hopped around from defense to defense myself. Against 1.e4, I play 1. ...e5 a lot. I am having a lot of problems against the King's Gambit lately. White isn't really getting an advantage but the positions are very little fun for black. Lately I've been playing more and more french defenses. I have tried 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. e5 b6 twice. You leave book fairly early with only a slight advantage to white. It's a really closed positional game though. The last time I played the Caro-Kann we rattled out book moves in the Panov-Botvinnik attack until I had a position that while equal was very hard to play. The sicilian accelerated dragon is nice, but an unambitious white player can just wait for d5 and trade off most of the pieces. The scandinavian isn't so hot either. You shuttle the queen around trying to get a caro-kann structure while white launches those darn kingside pawns at you. The Latvian is a fun opening. 3. Nxe5 kills most of the fun though. Alekhine's biggest problem is the exchange variation. The exd6 recapture is symmetrical and passive and cxd6 just walks into Be3 b3 Rc1 setup. I say go French. You just have to learn to like the exchange variation. The Petroff is ok too. The main line is the exact same pawn structure as the French exchange. I have tried every single opening at one time or another. They all have upsides and downsides. 🙂 Hope this helps at least a little.
The Latvian Gambit is an interesting choice.
However, after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.d4 d6 5.Nc4 fxe4 6.Be2! is as close to a refutation of the opening as you will get.
Black now cannot play the thematic early Qg6 which is problematic & White can now develop virtually with a free hand.
The main line after this is 6...Nc6 7.d5 Ne5 8.0-0 Nxc4 9.Bxc4 Qg6 10.Bb5+ which is very good in practice for White.
Originally posted by paulbuchmanfromficsAs a frequent Scandinavian player, I find that the lines that you claim aren't "so much fun" can actually be a lot of fun!
I forgot one thing. 1. e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6 isn't so fun either. 3. c4
A. 3. ... c6 4. d4 is a caro-kann panov-botvinnik
B. 3. ... e6 4. d4 (dxe6 may even win) is a french exchange.
2. ... Nf6 transposes into the french and caro-kann !!!
1 e4 d5 2 ed Nf6 3 c4 e6 4 de Be6 (the Icelandic Gambit) often leads to highly tactical melees.
1 e4 d5 2 ed Nf6 3 c4 Bg4 (the Portugese Variation) can also be quite lively.
Of all of the major defenses to 1 e4, the Scandinavian is probably by far the easiest to learn and usually allows Black to easily develop all of his pieces. In the Pirc/Modern defenses, which I also often play, it can take forever (if not longer) to develop all of your pieces. In the French the QB can be hard to find a good square for. There is seldom a "problem piece" in the Scandinavian, although Black often has to give up his QB for a knight.
What about 1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Nf6 3. c4 e6 4. d4 with a French exchange? You conveniently left that out. 3. ... e6 would probably get ripped apart too, by a very good player. Hodgson scored some wins with it and brought it into the limelight, but it has never been a top weapon. The Portuguese can get dull too. You are thinking of 3. d4 Bg4 4. f3? not 4. Be2 with a very positional struggle where black has a pawn on e6 vs a pawn on d4.
Originally posted by paulbuchmanfromfics1. Black has all of his opening problems solved in the Exchange French. As long as he avoids total symmetry and doesn't trade off all of the heavy pieces on the open e-file, Black has as much a chance to win as White.
What about 1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Nf6 3. c4 e6 4. d4 with a French exchange? You conveniently left that out. 3. ... e6 would probably get ripped apart too, by a very good player. Hodgson scored some wins with it and brought it into the limelight, but it has never been a top weapon. The Portuguese can get dull too. You are thinking of 3. d4 Bg4 4. f3? not 4. Be2 with a very positional struggle where black has a pawn on e6 vs a pawn on d4.
2. I agree that after 1 e4 d5 2 ed Nf6 3 d4 Bg4 5 Be2, a tactical melee is unlikely, but again Black's chances are probably no worse than White's.
In summary, while White can avoid major tactical complications by dodging the gambit lines, by doing so he allows Black to equalize. (Not that that is a bad thing, if it leads to a position in which White is happy to play.)
Originally posted by paulbuchmanfromficsI "conveniently" left that out because I don't think that's true. Black has excellent practical chances in the Icelandic Gambit. But you're right, if I was playing a Grandmaster I would indeed "get ripped apart." (Of course, I'd get ripped apart by a GM in any opening.)
You conveniently left that out. 3. ... e6 would probably get ripped apart too, by a very good player.
I used to think poorly of the Scandinavian, but since I started playing again I've been studying it, especially the 1. e4 d5 2. ed Qd5 3. Nc6 Qd6 lines... there is some tricky stuff! Of course, it can become a quiet game but then it looks like Black can obtain even chances without too much difficulty, and even chances is all you can ask for with Black. 😉
So I'm actually trying the petroff... it seems to be functioning, sort of, for me, vaguely.
But now that I'm actually playing 1. ... e5, every so often I run across 2. Bc4.
So, a question. Is there any horrible known trap in just playing something like a leningrad here? Like 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 f5? It seems like that is actually lots better than the regular leningrad, because if white accepts, black gets to play d5 with tempo in there somewhere, because of the lousy placement of the bishop...
Originally posted by paultopiaThat would be more akin to the Latvian or Mestel's Defense than the Leningrad, which is 1. ... f5, 2. ... g6 against 1. d4. I wouldn't call this position better than the Leningrad, which is founded on completely different ideas and principles.
So I'm actually trying the petroff... it seems to be functioning, sort of, for me, vaguely.
But now that I'm actually playing 1. ... e5, every so often I run across 2. Bc4.
So, a question. Is there any horrible known trap in just playing something like a leningrad here? Like 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 f5? It seems like that is actually lots better than t ...[text shortened]... gets to play d5 with tempo in there somewhere, because of the lousy placement of the bishop...
Originally posted by Ignatious MaxYeah, I meant latvian. For some reason my brain wrote leningrad.
That would be more akin to the Latvian or Mestel's Defense than the Leningrad, which is 1. ... f5, 2. ... g6 against 1. d4. I wouldn't call this position better than the Leningrad, which is founded on completely different ideas and principles.