10 Nov '07 23:05>
I have been studying the Art of Learning presentations by Waitzkin in the new Chessmaster. One thing he stressed was being true to yourself and playing chess that reflects that. I see myself as a fairly balanced player but with a strong preference for initiative, dynamic factors and attack when appropriate. My nightmare is having to sit on a position and simply defend without having any meaningful counterplay or active pieces. Even if the position is objectively equal, this is not in my nature. On the other hand, I need to know that I'm doing all this from a sound foundation. I would not play the Latvian gambit in any serious game and could probably not play it well anyway because I would lack confidence. Against e4, I enjoy playing the unbalanced positions arising from the Sicilian, particularly the Najdorf. I feel it suits my temperament and style well.
Considering all this, I have to wonder if the Nimzo and QID meet this criteria and keep me true to myself. All my Nimzo/QID games have been against players below my strength so of course I had a dynamic game, initiative and often attacking chances. The question is if these openings still offer this kind of play against those that are equal or better than me. Do players like me go for these openings or are they more likely to go for something like the Semi-Slav or KID. I wondered about this before too but I felt that these openings, by generally not having a static center and predetermined piece placement are inherently dynamic and that they are so flexible that it's possible to mold it into almost any style of game. What are your thoughts on this? I would like to know how Nimzo/QID players here would define their style and what they play against e4.
Considering all this, I have to wonder if the Nimzo and QID meet this criteria and keep me true to myself. All my Nimzo/QID games have been against players below my strength so of course I had a dynamic game, initiative and often attacking chances. The question is if these openings still offer this kind of play against those that are equal or better than me. Do players like me go for these openings or are they more likely to go for something like the Semi-Slav or KID. I wondered about this before too but I felt that these openings, by generally not having a static center and predetermined piece placement are inherently dynamic and that they are so flexible that it's possible to mold it into almost any style of game. What are your thoughts on this? I would like to know how Nimzo/QID players here would define their style and what they play against e4.