Originally posted by Zander 88Don't forget the other half: white can apply hypermodern principles too, you know.
I really don't think Sicilian should be considered hypermodern. Here is my list.
Pure hypermodern:
Alekine's defense
King's Indian
Grunfeld
Pirc Defense
Somewhat hypermodern:
Nimzo-indian
Queen's-indian
bogo-indian
I'm might of missed some, not thinking too well tonight 😕
They aren't really more difficult than classical openings. At thi ...[text shortened]... lay. I say experiment with the openings and then choose something you are comfotable with.
Originally posted by TommyCThat makes sense and probably explains the trouble I have. So is the solution 1) to continue to play classical openings until I get much more familiar with chess generally, and then take up the hypermodern openings? Or, 2) go ahead and study the hypermodern openings now, get familiar with the theory and find out just where to place those pieces, and go ahead and play them. No need to wait.
It's less obvious where to put your pieces in hypermodern openings - and if you get it wrong, they just trip over each other, and get rolled back by a wave of enemy pawns. This might be the difference you struggle with.
Originally posted by bassoIf I am right - don't focus on the openings, or one type. Focus on getting your pieces logically co-ordinated, whatever the position or type of opening!
That makes sense and probably explains the trouble I have. So is the solution 1) to continue to play classical openings until I get much more familiar with chess generally, and then take up the hypermodern openings? Or, 2) go ahead and study the hypermodern openings now, get familiar with the theory and find out just where to place those pieces, and go ahead and play them. No need to wait.