Article: 3560 of rec.games.chess.analysis Newsgroups: rec.games.chess.analysis Path: info!dregis From: dregis@exeter.ac.uk (D.Regis) Subject: Re: General opening advice Message-ID: Organization: University of Exeter, UK. References: <52q1eg$re0@news-e2b.gnn.com> <52tggn$rss@m1.cs.man.ac.uk> Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 09:07:36 GMT In article <52tggn$rss@m1.cs.man.ac.uk> johns@cs.man.ac.uk writes: >Here's another way of looking at it (from an 1800 player, for what it's worth). >Most games between ordinary players (B class and below) are (or could be) >decided tactically. There was a post from a 2000 player a while back who'd had >a program analyse a load of his games, and it came up with a significantly better >move (1.5 pawns or more) than what was played at some stage in *every game*. > >This suggests the following: >1). Tactics are important. At the moment I've stopped learning openings, I just work >on tactics the whole time. In consecutive rounds of my last congress my opponents overlooked mate in one! grades around 1800 ELO (1900 USCF?). But they were spotting all sorts of other tactics throughout the game. Tactics may be their biggest failing (and mine) but it doesn't mean that it's the easiest thing to cure. It's like telling a beginning skier not to fall over! The usual advice is: write your move down first, shut your eyes, and look again afresh. [See also An important note about Blumenfeld's rule -- DR] 

>2). Gambits are good. 1 e4 e5?! (1..e6!) 2 f4! will win a lot of games, whatever
>the ultimate truth of theory as discussed here. A pawn just isn't that much down
>this end of the aquarium.

I like the King's Gambit and have played it, but there are too many
good defences to the King's Gambit which are too well known for me to
recommend it, including counter-gambits which are no fun to sit
through. 


>3). Tactics early in the game will tend to favour White, because he has the
>initiative. This suggests that what you want to do, where possible, is to play
>open games/gambits with White, and closed games with Black. As well as being a
>strategy aimed at winning games (always good) it gives you experience with a 
>wide range of positions. 

There are lots of open counter-attacking systems for Black novices
after 1...e5, e.g. Italian Wilkes-Barre, Vienna Frankenstein-Dracula,
King's Gambit Nimzo Counter-Gambit, Ruy Cordel/Schliemann... no need to go
into a shell.

>You learn that a "weak square" doesn't always mean f7 :-)

Quote file!

>
>It's important, though, to have a clear plan as Black (e.g. in the French, erode
>the White centre) and not to be too passive. I wouldn't, for instance, recomend
>the Caro-Kann, because it's very easy to drift and leave White a big initiative
>if you're not Karpov.
>
>  John



-- 
May your pieces harmonise with your Pawn structure and
your sacrifices be sound in all variations

D  _       
 / "()/~   Dave Regis  &8^D*  WWW: http://www.ex.ac.uk/~dregis/DR/chess.html
|| \_/|    = DrDave on BICS 
~\   /                        "...what else exists in the world but chess?"
 _|||__SHEU: ~/sheu.html                                          -- NABOKOV


From info!dregis Fri Oct  4 12:07:20 BST 1996