Post by DHello William and thank you very much for your advice. Some comments,
inline, below.
Post by DHello chess experts,
I don't have a lot of time to study chess, but I still would like to
do something in order to give my father in law a challenge, and based
on my style (fairly defensive) and lack of time, I've ended up in the
Scandinavian opening and the Colle/Zukertort system for white.
I'm wondering if you have any advice relating to how to best study the two?
Or perhaps you have some "meta-advice" about what to avoid when
studying openings and systems?
Well, the Colle is an attacking system. Is it really for you? I play
the Reti, which often transposes into the English, Neo-Catalan or
Catalan. It's not a defensive system, but rapid attacks are rare.
There is a massive amount of theory, but nobody at my level (certainly
not I) knows it, so there's no burden there.
This is an interesting insight! I've always avoided openings with loads
of theory based on the thougth that I do not have time for it, nor the
inclination. Hence the "system approach". Of course I have also heard
that systems are bad for chess players, since it might stop or delay
your development if you just follow the system,
As long as you don't play by rote, you will learn whatever you play.
I don't think the Colle or the Stonewall are good openings, in the sense
that black can equalize more easily against these relatively simple
systems. But neither of us are grandmasters and both systems have more
than enough fine points to keep us and our opponents confused.
but in my case, I play
Post by Dfor fun and I have no ambition becoming a GM or even playing
competitively, so that is why I am fine with the system solution.
So you are playing the Reti despite the theory with the hope that your
opponents also do not know it (or at least less than you)?
I started playing it without any theoretical knowledge, I can recall
wondering what to play at move three in some lines. I suppose that over
the years I have acquired some knowledge, but not a huge amount.
But I do know ideas. What I like about the Reti and its related systems
is the flexibility. While the opponent does have a say, white's
possibilities include a queen side attack (based on the power of the
KB), delayed occupation of the centre (often very strong), undermining
of black's centre, or king-side attack. Reti endgames can often be very
good for white.
Post by DI did dabble with the Reti for a time but wasn't very good with it, so
that is why I dropped it, but perhaps it is worth having another look.
On lichess I am able to beat level 5 fairly often, and some times, but
not very often level 6. I have no idea if that tells you anything about
my skill level, but maybe it makes it easier perhaps to get a feel for
my situation.
Sounds like you are reasonably good. Stockfish at level six is usually
pretty good, but when the server is crowded it can play rather badly.
I've posted a few games I played here against five or six, often very
silly games, but six will definitely crush me if I'm not trying hard.
Post by DKen Smith wrote a book for class players advocating the Stonewall and
the Colle for white as openings which don't require a lot of theory -
compared, say, to opening 1e4 and meeting a booked up Sicilian player.
I knew a number of B players who swore by it.
I have heard about the Stonewall. Would you recommend that over the
Colle? Also, when you say "B" player, what is that?
Good question. The kind of B player I am referring to was rated
1600-1800 OTB years ago. So, probably 1800-2000 on Lichess.
I like playing the stonewall from either side (in fact even starting
with 1NF3 can lead to a stonewall-like formation which has won me some
very nice games OTB). I am not so fond of the Colle, though I think its
reputation among strong players is better.
Post by DIf you are a defensive player I would not recommend the Scandanavian.
The ultimate defensive opening against 1e4 is the Caro-Kann, favourite
of world champion Petrosian. The French may also be seen as
defensive, but you can't properly play the French without being
prepared to counter attack.
When I choose an opening Caro-Kann was actually on my list! So I think
you have a point there. What made me go for the Scandinavian (for the
moment) was that it is more systematic than Caro which requires more
preparation and theory. Both (if I am informed correctly) are positional
and attainable.
I like the Scandanavian, but only in the variation where black does is
prepared to gambit a pawn, playing Nf6 rather than recapturing the pawn.
After Qxd4 I find it very easy to lose.
I don't play the Caro-Kann, but I have noticed that I am annoyingly
unsuccessful against it. Time and again when I think I have an edge I
find that black's defensive resources are sufficient, and I drift into
an inferior endgame.
I started chess as a defensive/technical player. And many of my wins
were and are defensive ones (they have to be, given how often I get in
serious trouble in the opening). But I became a much stronger player
when I learned to enjoy the attack (and especially the counter-attack!).
All the great "defensive" players, even Petrosian, knew well how to
attack, and did so when the position called for it.
William Hyde
Post by DI have not read it myself, but Reuben Fine's "The ideas behind the
chess openings" has been frequently recommended. It will teach the
general
strategies and plans for each openings, without presenting a forest of
variations.
The thing to avoid is opening books which give columns of variations
without general discussion. I have several of these, useful sometimes
in postal chess, but not otherwise.
Oh yes! If I have a wall of chess moves in an opening book I just "space
out". It gives me very little. I need chess opening books with text,
lots of pictures tracking the position (so I don't have to visualize too
many moves in a row) and a pinch of humour. When I can find a book like
that I do manage to stick with it way longer than the "wall of text"
books.
Best regards, Daniel