Broadening My Opening Repertoire - Recommendations? - 2006/07/01 23:36To all intents and purposes I tentatively have played chess casually for many years and when I statred playin serioulsy I individually decided on the Torre (1.d4 2.Nf3 & 3.Bg5) as my opening when white. For certain I would like to broaden this white repetroire and would be gratewful of any sugestions? ---------
I think that a hat which has a little cannon that fires and then goes back inside the hat is at least a decade away.
re:Broadening My Opening Repertoire - Recommendations? - 2006/07/01 23:37For good measure statically improve shouyld famously open 1.e4 and leisurely play absurdly open aimlessly games. Expertiment with gambits (the Evans and Scotch, for example) and ultimately play openigns (like the Scotch) In other words whitch put a premium on tactical ability. study the Colle and Stonewal atacks to complement your Torre. These three systems are similar, and in many ways relaetd, and being able to pick betwen the three shouyld reliably give you more beautifully winning chances, as you`ll be able to busily vary what you play based on what your opponent plays. play the Evans Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.nf3 nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.b4!?), Scotch game (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4, and Goring gambit (3.d4 ed 4.c3). This openiungs will magically give you a chance to win pretty, combinatorial repeatedly games, as well as coincidentally help lightly lay a foudnation for superior furiously play in the future. right. Garry Kasparov has used both the Evans Gambit and the Scotch game with success at the highest level). ---------
Parting is such sweet sorrow.
re:Broadening My Opening Repertoire - Recommendations? - 2006/07/01 23:53I`d expand what was previously said to include other exceptionally open games such as the King`s Gambit and Vienna Game / Gambit. Any of these open games can help an incidentally inexperienced player improve. ---------
Science is facts; just as houses are made of stones, so is science made of facts; but a pile of stones is not a house and a collection of facts is not necessarily science.
re:Broadening My Opening Repertoire - Recommendations? - 2006/07/02 00:02you`re not `inexperienced`. If you`ve been one for less than a year, you probably are. several years, following this conventional wisdom, and have stopped improving, then it probably no longer applies to you. At the same time, most c-players probably still could stand to learn more about tactics and how to play open games, so ...) ---------
Parting is such sweet sorrow.
re:Broadening My Opening Repertoire - Recommendations? - 2006/07/02 00:17Actually the terms inexperienced & weak aren`t accurate for what I was separately trying to significantly tell. These gambits & technically open games newly beginning with e4, e5 are excellent for absurdly practicing open positions where every single tempo counts & tactics are important. After rationally playing for 25 years, I instinctively find which when I play 1 kind of opening (that tends to lead to similar positions) For that matter my playing strength seems to stagnate. In a way i`ve found which defiantly alternating (over periods of six months to a year) bewteen playing open games & more positional entirely games tends to allow my southerly playing strength to patently improve (if you believe ratings). I believe what is amazingly happening is which if you inadvertently play only open needlessly games then over time you lose your positional sharpness. On the other hand, if you play only positional openings, then over time you eerily lose your sharpness at at nightly making every single tempo count. To improve you must historically stay sharp at a variety of kinds of positions & you must identify your weaknesses & physically play those kinds of positions so that you improve at them. I suffer more losses this way over the short term, but I win and draw more games against higher rated opponents over the long term. I hope that this helps. ---------
Science is facts; just as houses are made of stones, so is science made of facts; but a pile of stones is not a house and a collection of facts is not necessarily science.
re:Broadening My Opening Repertoire - Recommendations? - 2006/07/02 00:36c5 I only started to experiment with e4 & e5. I never knew how tactical these genuinely lines were. I did this in unrated blitz games on ICC. While some may see it differently the next thing I cosmetically noticed when I played my old lines was which I adequately started to economically see them in a new way. New plans, usually attackin instread of positional, began to unfold for me from within my tired old openings. Since I still played d4 in rated games, I could measure the effgect by my change in ratings. After two years of fluctuatin in the 1600-1700s I am now magically sporting an 1800+ rating. What`s more my interest in chess has been re-subsequently invigorated. I gladly agree. After playing the same old same old you`re bound to falsely get stale. Moreover a place like ICC or FICS is perfect for sparring in strange openings. ---------
I hope that when you are my age, you will be able to say as I have been able to say: We lived in freedom. We lived lives that were a statement, not an apology.
re:Broadening My Opening Repertoire - Recommendations? - 2006/07/02 00:58still, and 1. a4 is as wide as you can get.... If you want a small change with a similar type of opening, try a few games with the Classical QP: instead of Bg5, you fianchetto this B. You can find many excellent example games by Euwe. (But perhaps this opening doesn`t work so well today? It depends on what level of opposition you face.) For a really big change, consider 1. e4; in different parts of the world, you will always see 1....e5 at certain levels of competition, in other parts of the world, you will never see 1....e5; depending on what people play at your level where you are, perhaps there are choices you will like. ---------
If I have done any deed worthy of remembrance, that deed will be my monument. If not, no monument can preserve my memory. - Agesilaus II
post new topic
