Like many young players, I used to be overly obsessed with the opening, memorizing lines (that I’d never see in a tournament), spending too much time on the first 10 moves and little if anything on endgame principles, etc. After a long break from the game I came back and promised myself I would focus on more important aspects of the game - tactical awareness and recognition of motifs, for example - and just stick to an opening where I can get the general idea without worrying about sharp variations I need to know 25 moves deep or end up in trouble.
On the black side this hasn’t been a problem; a combination of the French and Stonewall Dutch (basically open with 1…e6 and work from there) has suited me fine. On the white side I decided to pick 1. d4, and while I can’t say it’s been a disaster by any means, I find myself again spending too much time worrying about all the possible variations. For instance, the Nimzo-Indian drives me crazy (currently I’m trying the f3 sideline against it), and I can’t stand the Benko gambit. It seems that time and theory has given Black plenty of perfectly viable ways to take the driver’s seat - not in respect to having an advantage (I’m not saying d4 is ‘busted’), but in determining the structure of the ensuing game. If chess is a swimming pool, d4 is the deep end.
It’s one thing to say that opening understanding doesn’t matter as much as the middlegame, tactics, and the endgame (and on some level that’s very true), but when in a tournament if you consistently get a =/+ position out of the opening you don’t have the luxury of working on your endgame if you can’t make it that far. I don’t know if that’s necessarily been the case with my games, but sometimes it feels like it.
In any case, I am thinking of making one - FINAL - switch to my opening preparation. Picking something where the opponent is less likely to be prepared, or there are less “fully formed trees” of variations in reply to it, and/or that I can grasp generally more quickly so that I can focus my limited time on other aspects of the game. I accept that I will never be a Master (I still have hope for Expert however), and I don’t need to have a Master’s repertoire. I am considering the Bird opening (f4). It didn’t hurt that just trying it out against GNUChess recently I got a draw (when I frequently get rolled over against the Nimzo).
Do any of you have advice on what opening system as white to pick - or why I should stick with d4 and stop whining about the Benko? Would you recommend the Bird? Play a reversed French with 1. e3? Start every game 1. Nc3 2. Nb1 and build up my chess ability by trying not to lose? How have you solved your opening prep problems?
You should pick openings that match up with your personality. Are you a solid, rational thinker who likes positional play? Do you find yourself becoming impatient and want to attack/counterattack? If you select openings that don’t match with who you are, it tends to get a little frustrating, even if you are learning to handle new positions.
There is nothing wrong with staying with 1.d4. How much time do you have to study? If you are content with playing a “system” opening, you might try the London System (which some wags call the Boring Opening, or The Old Man’s Bad Habit). Another such opening is the Colle Opening. Both have similar goals. There are several books on the market which outline the move orders and the middlegame plans quite well. Check out “Win with the London System” by Johnsen and Kovacevic as well as “Ideas Behind Modern Chess Openings” by Gary Lane. Lane also has written “The Ultimate Colle” which cover both the Colle and the Zukertort variations. Koltanowski’s book on the Colle has a very easy to read format to get a player new to the opening started. Note how thes lines avoid your present bugaboo, the Benko Opening.
If you are more ambitious, and want to play a greater variety of positions, there is no other choice but to work hard and develop your own repertoire of lines. There is a good reason why some variations are main lines. Higher rated players just love to see lower ranked players deviate to some sideline to avoid “book” theory. These sidelines often have pitfalls and are hard for the amateur to evaluate properly. If you prepare properly, the higher rated player will often “blink” first to get you off well trodden paths, sometimes to his cost.
As a master, I often have certain “crises” with different openings. After a bad game I sit down and do a careful analysis and put my findings in a notebook. I pull all of the relevant opening books off the shelf, check out the Informants and NIC YB, and figure out the proper move order. There is nothing like a bad loss that makes you want to study. If I have time, I’ll play some practice games (G15) with a friend or with Fritz or other computer progam. Sorry, there aren’t many shortcuts, in chess or in life. It’s always hard work and keeping your confidence that makes for success.
How long have you played 1. d4? Is there anything you do like in your current repertoire? (for example, do you like playing against the King’s Indian, or the QGD) If you’ve played QP openings a lot, and like most of the positions you get, it would be a shame to throw away all your experience in it. The thing is, chess isn’t easy, and any opening you pick will have problem lines.
You could start with the stuff you like and try to figure out how to avoid the stuff you don’t; for example, if you play and like main-line King’s Indians and QGDs, you could start with 1. d4 and 2. Nf3; there was a nice book a few years back by Pallisier called ( I think) Play 1.d4! that had a solid repertoire with suggestsions for a simple anti-Benoni line and a line against the Queen’s Indian, and so on.
If you do go for 1. f4, Tim Taylor’s book on the Bird from a couple of years ago is quite good–he’s pretty honest about the problems and isn’t afraid to say that White doesn’t get an advantage in many lines.
If you want to say more about your current repertoire, I might have more specific suggestions.
If a game starts 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6/g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 I’m happy - I don’t mind playing against this or King’s Indian (I play the 4 pawns attack). It’s really just the Nimzo-Indian and Benoni/Benko (early c5 stuff) that I find bothersome. Maybe 1. d4 2. Nf3 would suit me more by avoiding those systems, but I’d also lose out on the 4 pawns…but as you say, chess isn’t easy. And I agree it would seem like a waste to have spent all this time so far on d4 and switch everything to f4. On the other hand, if I end up with reversed-Dutch positions, at least I’m somewhat comfortable with that from the Black side. Thanks for the book recommendations.
It’s good to know even the top 5% have issues with their openings. And your response to a bad opening game (study it to find where you went wrong, look up the right path, practice to keep it in memory) is probably better than mine (look to completely change what you play). Thanks.
Yeah, you can’t play the Four Pawns or the Exchange QGD if you use an early Nf3. That means you 'd have to bite the bullet and find lines against the Nimzo and Benko (the Modern Benoni you can meet with an early f4 system–I think you can transpose directly into the Four Pawns). Alas, I don’t have experience facing those, though I do expect you’ll like the Saemisch or 4. f3 better than other lines against the Nimzo–sometimes you can get a big central pawn-roller going.
I rarely play e4 as white. I prefer tactical chances, even if it means sharp games rife with possibilities on both sides to find winning lines. I almost alwasy start out with d4.
As black, I have quite a repetiore actually. Favoring indian and french lines the most.
Starting with 1. e3 is not a terrible idea! You can later play d4, or c4, or b3, or f4 and transpose into Bird’s. Once you transpose you may encounter the opponent’s opening knowledge but it’s less likely. I am having trouble thinking of a line (for Black) where he’s really happy that his pawn is on e7 rather than e6, so you’re gaining a move over being Black that can be useful and is unlikely to be harmful.
It’s hard to get thru the opening now without memorizing stuff. Computerization has led to the crystallization of what is acceptable play, and if you can’t reliably work that out at the board (very few can) you would have to memorize.
An opponent hit me with 1. e3 at a tournament for the first time last week, and I responded with 1. … e5, going for a French with colors reversed. In this case, my opponent was just a patzer, so it was too easy for me to have to think that hard, but that’s not the point. Responding with the same pawn my opponent started with just seemed to make sense here. Given the pawn on e5, I can’t imagine the transposition to a Bird would be easy to achieve. I don’t really know anything about the Bird, though. Does black often play e5 in it?
No, from that position you could get a reversed French but probably not a Bird. e3 e5; f4 ef4; ef4 is not terrible for White – he should still succeed in castling kingside – but not very inspiring either. (I think; I don’t play the Bird so maybe that pawn on f4 is more wonderful than I realize.)