QGA and Philidor's

I want to learn those two openings and create an opening repertoire for black for tournament play. Can you suggest any books?

Originally posted by anthias
I want to learn those two openings and create an opening repertoire for black for tournament play. Can you suggest any books?

Why those two?

Originally posted by anthias
I want to learn those two openings and create an opening repertoire for black for tournament play. Can you suggest any books?

"How to beat 1 d4" by James Rizzitano is a nice start for the Queen's Gambit Accepted, and it also covers some common early White deviations 1.d4 d5 2.Nc3/e3/Nf3 etc.

For the Philidor, none other than "The Philidor Files" by Bauer.

--

I have those books. "How to beat d4" looks great, but it's full of theory. Whenever I start a main line I see something like "other alternatives are..." and a page full of minor variations. I've never had an opening repertoire before so I need help. Should I attempt to consume all of the book or just parts of it?

Originally posted by anthias
I have those books. "How to beat d4" looks great, but it's full of theory. Whenever I start a main line I see something like "other alternatives are..." and a page full of minor variations. I've never had an opening repertoire before so I need help. Should I attempt to consume all of the book or just parts of it?

I think the key is to play the lines you're learning. I haven't opened a chess book in my life but by playing on here and using databases for the openings I've memorized pretty much every mainline (e4, d4) opening and a number of the variants for the black side. One of the keys using this method is to only have one or two openings for each side. For example I will respond to c4 and d4 with e6 and I will match e4 with e5. That way your opening knowledge can be limited and still complete.

That is what I aimed at. Both the Philidors and the QGA are pretty forcing openings. And I also play the Colle and the Barry/150 attack against 2...Nf6. The trouble is reading those theory packed books. I spent five hours yesterday to memorize the first 6 pages of 'How to Beat 1.d4'. Is that normal?

Originally posted by anthias
That is what I aimed at. Both the Philidors and the QGA are pretty forcing openings. And I also play the Colle and the Barry/150 attack against 2...Nf6. The trouble is reading those theory packed books. I spent five hours yesterday to memorize the first 6 pages of 'How to Beat 1.d4'. Is that normal?

I don't think so. Imo your time is much better spent on here or playing otb chess. Books can be nice because you're learning directly from a master but lines are better memorized through 'osmosis' persay.

Originally posted by anthias
I want to learn those two openings and create an opening repertoire for black for tournament play. Can you suggest any books?

You could get "Starting Out: the Queen's Gambit Accepted". It's not as heavy on the theory and gives you the basics of the QGA.

Actually I just one click ordered it from amazon.com a few seconds ago 😛

Is the QGA actually good? Everything I've read seems to say it's better to decline...what are some advantages of accepting the QG?

Originally posted by yofidawg
Is the QGA actually good? Everything I've read seems to say it's better to decline...what are some advantages of accepting the QG?

From what I understand, accepting it generally leads to more open positions, while declining it generally leads to closed play. Mainly a matter of preference; the QGA does give black a slight statistical disadvantage, but like any opening that allows white to occupy the center with pawns, black can usually equalize in the earlier middlegame.

Yet the Philidor is rather closed 😛 but I guess after 3.d4 exd4 black has somewhat similar pawn structures.

Originally posted by anthias
I want to learn those two openings and create an opening repertoire for black for tournament play. Can you suggest any books?

The QGA is a very solid, interesting choice. Many top GMs play it, and it has withstood theoretical scrutiny. Rizzitano's book is an excellent choice for a repertoire (and it also includes lines against non-c4 lines like the London, Colle, Stonewall, etc.).

The Philidor, on the other hand, is not nearly as well respected as the QGA. If you are going to play 1...e5 you have many more interesting choices such as the Petroff, 2...Nc6 and the Black side of the Lopez, Italian/Two Knights, etc. The Philidor isn't terrible, and the "Philidor Files" is a very good book. While the Philidor might be underrated, it would be better for your chess to play something more theoretically respectable.

Scott

Originally posted by yofidawg
Is the QGA actually good? Everything I've read seems to say it's better to decline...what are some advantages of accepting the QG?

There isn't anything theoretically unsound about the QGA. Accepting or declining is rather a matter of taste and what kind of position you're aiming for.

Top GMs like Kasparov, Anand and Kramnik have used this opening so that's sort of a "seal of approval".
Kasparov used the QGA in his WC match against Kramnik, and Kramnik recently played the QGA (by transposition) in his WC match against Topalov as well as his match against Deep Fritz.

I will probably change my choice of Philidor, but my question remains the same. Let's say I have the book Staring out: The Colle with me. Must I memorize the whole book? Is that the point of opening books?