22 ( +1 | -1 ) Pet systemsI find that the more you go into chess, the more you want to find an opening you can truly call your own. I'm still looking for an opening I can call my own, but I'm interested - what opening would you call your own?
26 ( +1 | -1 ) The Halloween gambit !1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nxe5 I like looking at my opponents when playing this fourth move. You can read on their faces "unbelievable", "this cannot be sound", "this man must be crazy ! ", "doesn't he see the pawn is protected ?" and other things like that.
135 ( +1 | -1 ) verticalchessThis is my best Halloweengame (although I lost it, but I was black and I was playing against a FM with 2389 FIDE ELO) : 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.Nxe5 Nxe5 5.d4 Ng6 6.e5 Ng8 7.Bc4 Bb4 8.Qf3 f6 9.0-0 Bxc3 10.bxc3 d5 11.exd6! « White wants the king to stay in the center by the bishop on c4 or b3 » (A. Torrecillas) ) [11.Bxd5 was Fritz choice 11...Bg4 12.Bc6+ bxc6 13.Qxg4 is the game Torrecillas-Jerez in the same tournament] 11...cxd6 [11...Qxd6 is another possibility 12.Re1+ N8e7 13.a4 Qd7 14.Ba3=] 12.Ba3! with pressure on the isolated pawn 12...N8e7 13.Rfe1 Qc7 14.Bb3 Kd8?! maybe not the best move, but the bishop battery is very strong, also in the alternatives [14...a5 15.Rab1 Bd7 16.Qd5 Kd8 or 14...Kf8 15.Qg3 Nf5 16.Qf3 h5] 15.c4 played to open line. « All white pieces are developed and I need to open the position « . (A.Torrecillas.) 15...Bd7 16.Rad1 Qc6 17.Qc3 a5 18.d5 Qc7 19.c5 b5 20.Qd2 b4 21.cxd6 Qxd6 22.Bb2 a4 23.Bc4 « white wants to exchange some pawns. Black need pawns to win the ending and with less pawns black's king has more problems « (A.Torrecillas.) 23...Ke8 24.a3! [24.c3 Ne5 25.Be2 a3 26.Ba1 Ba4 27.Rb1 bxc3 28.Qxc3 Kf7 29.Qg3 Rhb8-+] 24...Ne5 the only good move, white may not be allowed to open the a3-d6 diagonal for the bishop [24...Rb8? 25.Qd3 Kf8 26.axb4 Rc8 27.Ba2 Qxb4 28.Ba3 Qc3 29.Bxe7+ Nxe7 30.d6] 25.Ba2 b3 26.cxb3 axb3 27.Bxb3 Kf7 28.f4 [28.Rxe5 fxe5 29.Bxe5 could result in a draw] 28...N5g6? [28...Ng4! 29.Qb4 (29.Re6 Qb8!) 29...Nf5 30.Qxd6 Nxd6 31.h3 Rhb8 32.Rd3 Nh6÷] 29.Re6 Qxf4 30.Qe2 Qb8 31.Ba2 Qa7+ 32.Kh1 Kf8 33.d6 Ng8 34.Qc4 Nh6 35.Bxf6 gxf6 36.Rxf6+ Ke8 37.Rxg6 hxg6 38.Qc3 Rh7 39.Qf6 Ba4 40.Qxg6+ Nf7 41.Rf1 Bc2 42.Qxc2 resigned. 1-0 There is no more hope : 42...Nxd6 43.Qg6+; 42...Ne5 43.Qe4 Rh5 44.Bf7+ Kd7 45.Bxh5 Qa5 46.Rf6 42...Rg7 43.Qc6+ Kf8 44.d7 Qb8 45.Qe6 Kg8 46.Rxf7 Torrecillas,A (2389) - Keiser,P (1932) , Halloween Tournament (cr e-mail), 20.01.2003
19 ( +1 | -1 ) My favoriteas black is Owen's Defense and as White the Nimzowitsch Attack. Although I have lately become very fond of gambits and like the Latvian as black and the Halloween and Urusov as white.
32 ( +1 | -1 ) I likeboth attacking and defending against the Morra Gambit. Mafia style. Of course, I rarely get the chance of playing against it, and as it is the only opening I know in some depth, I usually lose those many sicilian games where white doesn't play 2.d4... I should probably learn an alternative...
6 ( +1 | -1 ) Najdorf sicilianthat's my territory. anyone care to prove me wrong?
42 ( +1 | -1 ) ...Thank you for the replies, everyone.
kieserpaul , you are fast becoming one of my favorite players here.
I have a second question, by the way. I played a Queen's Gambit Accepted game a long while back that started pretty strangely to me:
1. d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4 3. e4 Qd6
Anybody know of such a variation's name - regardless of how unorthodox? It turned out to be somewhat effective.
2 ( +1 | -1 ) May I askWhat is the purpose of 3...Qd6? :-)
32 ( +1 | -1 ) ...I'm not sure. It was played against me once. I suppose the black player has the idea of pinning king and bishop if white were to try to capture the accepting pawn. I figured it is probably just a deviation from how the line should be, but I was curious to see if it was ever played before - I certainly never saw it before that one game.
55 ( +1 | -1 ) imho...Saying and believing you have a pet systems is wonderful but don't reley to heavily on them. Remember if your "pet" line doesn't really start till the fourth move you opponent can easily derail you. For instance, if you were to only study the halloween gambit what if black plays for a philidor or latvian system. We are still within the e5 tree but you will be hard pressed to apply your halloween theory here. Lets be honest we can't know all theory so instead why not apply our study to reduce the number of possible branches available.
117 ( +1 | -1 ) diarryI was ( and I am) a 1.Nc3 player for years. This opening has several names. Queens Knight gambit, Van Geet opening, Dunst opening, ... One of the names is Sleipnir Opening. Sleipnir was the eight fooded flying horse of the God Odin. The name was derived of the fact that there are eight good possible answers for black at the first move. ( in fact 1.Nc3 is not one opening, it is a collection of several openings, each with their own characteristics. ). So in my repertoire I have an answer to each of this eight moves. Now 3 of these 8 moves can lead to the Halloween gambit : 1. .. Nf6, 1. .. Nc6, 1. .. e5. Suppose 1. .. e5 is the answer, then I am playing 2.e4. We are in the Vienna then and the main line goes 2. .. Nf6. Nearly everybody will play this move. Then I play 3.Nc3 . How shall Black defend the pawn ? 3. .. d6 just is an inferior move, ( 4.d4 gives White an excellent game), 3. .. Nc6 is logical . And then I can play the Halloween. Of course you have to study other openings. You have to study ALL openings, not because you will ever play them, but because you can use the principles of these openings in similar positions sooner or later. You need to know a little bit of everything besides a profoundly knowledge of a limited part.
84 ( +1 | -1 ) keiserpaulStudy ALL openings? Yeah right, excellent advise when nearly everyone here is a hobbist or casual player. Have you absolutely no life? I am a very active adult OTB tournament player but this is certainly second to my family, children, career, ect. There is nothing unsound about with making resonable reduction in required theory. If I enjoy responding to d4 with d5 and score well with it why do I even need to look at the benoni, king's indian, ect. Or, conversly as I enjoy the czech benoni against d4. Why when I never play d4 would I even look at tarrasch theory, QGD or QGA? If I were to even try to learn ALL theory I would never get to play I would forever be in a opening book. I suppose I could just let Fritz help me along with the opening theory but whats the point?
83 ( +1 | -1 ) keiserpaulStudy ALL openings? Yeah right, excellent advise when nearly everyone here is a hobbist or casual player. Have you absolutely no life? I am a very active adult OTB tournament player but this is certainly second to my family, children, career, ect. There is nothing unsound about making resonable reduction in required theory. If I enjoy responding to d4 with d5 and score well with it why do I even need to look at the benoni, king's indian, ect. Or, conversly as I enjoy the czech benoni against d4. Why when I never play d4 would I even look at tarrasch theory, QGD or QGA? If I were to even try to learn ALL theory I would never get to play I would forever be in a opening book. I suppose I could just let Fritz help me along with the opening theory but whats the point?
59 ( +1 | -1 ) diarryI have not said that studying openings means that you have to spend the rest of your life on it. ( Read my words : "a little bit"). Studying all openings does not mean that you have to look at each branch, just have a look at the main line is often enough. This knowledge can help you in other games. One example : you write you will never study the Tarrasch. But studying the Tarrasch mean studying how to handle an isolated pawn. And an isolated pawn on the board does not only occur in the Tarrasch. You can meet it in other games too.