Originally posted by z00tI play alot of different openings. My broad opening repertoire allows me to be incompetent in a variety of different openings, instead of being incompetent in just one opening.
Play everything this is a CC site so you can follow the first few book lines. I'm tired of people who only play one opening, learn how to play :-
- Sharp attacking lines
- Boring positional lines
- Win a pawn and then convert the win Capablanca style.
- Play mickey mouse openings like the (ahem avoid mentioning them)
Originally posted by gaychessplayerWell said. I am trying to branch out. I now play the petrov and (by transposition) the two knights against 1. e4.
I play alot of different openings. My broad opening repertoire allows me to be incompetent in a variety of different openings, instead of being incompetent in just one opening.
Originally posted by gaychessplayerIt's plain stupid.
I've been playing the "The Defense Game" lately with both colors. Since I play it with both colors, I'll note the moves in descriptive notation: 1 P-K3 2 P-Q3 3 N-K2 4 N-Q2 5 N-KN3 6 N-QN3 7 B-K2 8 B-Q2.
"The Defense Game" by Pafu can be perused for free:
It looks stupid and passive, but if often becomes stupid and active!
Originally posted by exigentskyI dont care which move is objectively the best. I care to get positions which I like to play. And thats all.
I know this has been covered many times, but theory has changed since then. :p I'm ditching my Accelerated Dragon and I am searching for a good replacement. I don't just want an opening I like, I want an opening I consider to be absolutely the best. It's true that no one REALLY know what response is best, but as long as I'm convinced, that's all that matt ...[text shortened]... st liking it, but actually thinking that it is the theoretically most challenging move.