Originally posted by wormwoodi think the d4 opening requires a bit more knowledge on chess and positionings which could be why ppl think it to be more boring. I remember hearing fischer was accused of lacking a knowledge on the d4 game and it being his biggest weakness. hence why spassky always initiated a d4 opening on him when he played white.
I've been wondering why people think d4 is a boring opening. just pile the forces behind the center, sac, and ka-boom! I think it's more about how you play it than what you play.
I've been playing exclusively d4 recently, and tactics are my strongest point by far. I look at d4 more as unstoppable power than playing it safe. e4 gives you a s ...[text shortened]... gantic killer that demolishes everything with its momentum.
I'm more of a big wave guy.
Originally posted by pawnfondlerFischer had plenty of knowledge of the KID though.
i think the d4 opening requires a bit more knowledge on chess and positionings which could be why ppl think it to be more boring. I remember hearing fischer was accused of lacking a knowledge on the d4 game and it being his biggest weakness. hence why spassky always initiated a d4 opening on him when he played white.
Anybody here use the Grunfeld? It's always been very interesting to me.
1 edit
Originally posted by cmsMaster1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 g6 3 Nc3 d5 im trying it out in a couple of my tournament games here. ive watched in a few matches on chess games now. it draws more often than anyone wins it. but it is an interesting opening.
Fischer had plenty of knowledge of the KID though.
Anybody here use the Grunfeld? It's always been very interesting to me.
im following it with Nf3 BG5.
Originally posted by pawnfondlerHrm, I wasn't aware of the drawing stuff - but I'm just looking for something insane, which is hard to find against 1.d4.
1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 g6 3 Nc3 d5 im trying it out in a couple of my tournament games here. ive watched in a few matches on chess games now. it draws more often than anyone wins it. but it is an interesting opening.
1 edit
well if you wanna see how its playing out check out my game 2786975 its still in progress so dont make any comments, but the guy is playing as black and just blundered, so its not very interesting at the moment. but i guess it shows if you go with the pawn conflict in the middle white comes out ahead 😉
Originally posted by pawnfondlerI don't think white's necessarily better in the Grunfeld - there are plenty of games to support me as well.
well if you wanna see how its playing out check out my game 2786975 its still in progress so dont make any comments, but the guy is playing as black and just blundered, so its not very interesting at the moment. but i guess it shows if you go with the pawn conflict in the middle white comes out ahead 😉
I still can't decide on a response, and it's driving me nuts.
I've tested:
KID - right when I started playing, it's nice but theoretical...
Semi-Slav - just doesn't feel wild enough
Benko - IDK, it's nice, but I don't really know if I like the resulting positions that much... :/
Considering:
Nimzo Indian/Bogo Indian - Just worried about the theory and possible boring continuations
Grunfeld - Pretty much the same thing
IDK, any help here?
Originally posted by cmsMasterQGD Baltic Defence?
I still can't decide on a response, and it's driving me nuts.
I've tested:
KID - right when I started playing, it's nice but theoretical...
Semi-Slav - just doesn't feel wild enough
Benko - IDK, it's nice, but I don't really know if I like the resulting positions that much... :/
Considering:
Nimzo Indian/Bogo Indian - Just worried about the ...[text shortened]... ssible boring continuations
Grunfeld - Pretty much the same thing
IDK, any help here?
It's not particularly sound, but the tactics can make it confusing for your opponent.
Originally posted by Ian68Well, tbh, I'd prefer something that is sound - now that I'm over 1600 and trying for 1700/1800 I really want something pretty sound. In any case I've never heard of the Baltic Defense, but I generally assume QGD = boring.
QGD Baltic Defence?
It's not particularly sound, but the tactics can make it confusing for your opponent.
Originally posted by cmsMasterI don't think you're wrong to try various openings in an attempt to see what you like best. But be aware that every opening will have lines that for one reason or another don't please you as much as the rest. Sometimes when this is the case, rather than be tempted to look elsewhere, you may need to look more into these lines for new ideas. Sometimes with a bit of work (e.g. analysing some relevant GM games), a line that you don't like playing can become more interesting.
I still can't decide on a response, and it's driving me nuts.
I once switched from the Caro-Kann to 1.e4 e5 in order to give my opponent more problems in the opening, esp. in the quieter lines of the CK. However, 1.e4 e5 brought it's own problematic lines. And so would the Sicilian, French, etc. So now when I'm losing faith in a CK line, I try to find some e.g. Capablanca, Karpov, etc. games in that line. 10 out of 10 times I realise it's my handling of the line that is causing the problem, i.e. I don't understand the resulting middlegame well enough.
Just a thought based on my experience of "opening hoppping". But of course, it is also possible that you should change opening if you're generally not suited to playing it.
1 edit
Originally posted by VarenkaOh trust me, I know that. I plan to stick with the KG, Dragon, Ruy (If I do decide to pick this up in the future, right now I only use it occasionally in blitz), Freak Attack, Yugoslav Attack, adv. Caro-Kann, etc. But against 1.d4 I just haven't found anything that I really feel comfortable using. It's insanely frustrating.
I don't think you're wrong to try various openings in an attempt to see what you like best. But be aware that every opening will have lines that for one reason or another don't please you as much as the rest. Sometimes when this is the case, rather than be tempted to look elsewhere, you may need to look more into these lines for new ideas. Sometimes with possible that you should change opening if you're generally not suited to playing it.
I see you didnt move for over 40 days - what happened?
1 edit
Originally posted by cmsMasterYou should study either the Budapest gambit OR the Grunfeld. Both of these openings are sharp lines for Black with lots of tactics, which is what you like.
Well, tbh, I'd prefer something that is sound - now that I'm over 1600 and trying for 1700/1800 I really want something pretty sound. In any case I've never heard of the Baltic Defense, but I generally assume QGD = boring.