I picked up a chess book for 25 cents the other day, and promptly dove into "How to Think Ahead in Chess," by Horowitz and Reinfeld. I liked the style of writing, and the main idea appealed to me, namely, learn one offensive opening well, as well as two defensive openings, against 1. e4 and 1. d4. Well, I thought, that's brilliant!
The offensive game they recommend is the Stonewall Attack, and their two illustrative games show white positively creaming black. Armed with this "extensive" chess theory in hand, I set out to vanquish my enemy. Well, things didn't go according to plan. I actually had quite a bit of trouble with this opening. It's not so easy to smash the enemy as they make it out to be, much to my chagrin. So what's the consensus among you experts about the playability of the Stonewall Attack?
Originally posted by bassoThis is the typical B.S. dished out by IMs needing something to sell. The stonewall attack and the dragon are themes that have been recycled for years. They conveniently leave out the thorny issues with these systems leaving beginners to discover the drawbacks on their own.
I picked up a chess book for 25 cents the other day, and promptly dove into "How to Think Ahead in Chess," by Horowitz and Reinfeld. I liked the style of writing, and the main idea appealed to me, namely, learn one offensive opening well, as well as two defensive openings, against 1. e4 and 1. d4. Well, I thought, that's brilliant!
The offensive game th ...[text shortened]... So what's the consensus among you experts about the playability of the Stonewall Attack?
I think it's an excellent idea to learn a couple of openings really well when you're a beginner. I myself learnt the stonewall when I was about 14 and played nothing else as White for the next five years.
To be honest, I don't think it is a good opening for a beginner (as I was) to play. It is too rigid and there is just one idea - mate on h7. If this doesn't work White is left with a horrible pawn structure and great difficulties in coming up with a new plan. Black can generally go for the minority attack against White's pawn on c3.
Originally posted by RegicidalIf I could I give you a bunch of recs for your insight!!
[b]This is the typical B.S. dished out by IMs needing something to sell.
Sort of like books advertising "once secret Russian training methods."
I bought the book years ago and quickly found out it didn't work like Horowitz said. Esp. if Black fianchettos his KB!
I tried this opening several times and it's very hard to play. It's very positional stuff and you need patience.
It is good against computers though. As long as the computer isn't way stronger then you, you got a decent chance winning the game with this opening since computers are so good positionally yet.
Originally posted by bassoI have the book also. I played this opening for about a year. I stopped playing it becuase i felt it messed up my pawns pretty bad. Also in playing this I lost a lot to players who I felt I was better than? This happend in very closed postions. I started playing Ruy lopez and have been doing well with that.
I picked up a chess book for 25 cents the other day, and promptly dove into "How to Think Ahead in Chess," by Horowitz and Reinfeld. I liked the style of writing, and the main idea appealed to me, namely, learn one offensive opening well, as well as two defensive openings, against 1. e4 and 1. d4. Well, I thought, that's brilliant!
The offensive game th ...[text shortened]... So what's the consensus among you experts about the playability of the Stonewall Attack?