98 ( +1 | -1 ) Openings you love or hate to play againstMy personal opinion is one must choose openings based on own taste & skill level, instead of trying anything that might (or might not!) be annoying for opponents. You can never find an opening variation all opponents hate to play against, but you can find openings that maximize your chances to get a position you like.
Anyway, I still have two questions for the members of GK:
1. What is your opening move as White and do you have certain defences you hope your opponent to (not) play? How about as Black? Is it because of good/poor success against certain opening or because of position that simply is/isn't to your taste?
2. Does this factor play any role in choosing your opening repertoire, or do you simply play openings you like?
Thanks for any responses
Since I choose my openings 100% based on my tastes, regardless of my opponent, I am not trying to find out what lines my future opponents hate...this post is just for discussion! :)
49 ( +1 | -1 ) Ruy LopezRuy Lopez is one of my favorite openings as white, followed by Grob's Attack. I use to play these 2 openings as white in Tournaments. As black I play either Sicilian or Petroff against E4. And Kings Indian or Nimzo Indian against D4
I like being white when some plays Phildors Defence which is 1. E4 E5 2. Ktf3 D6 3. D4 I have won most games Ive played against it.
Ruy Lopez was the second opening for white I ever learnt, after the Guiciano Piano (not sure on spelling).
13 ( +1 | -1 ) One thing I like about gameknotis the ability to check what opening you opponents usually play, and you can prepare a little in advance against it. Particularly in Tournaments.
65 ( +1 | -1 ) poor repertoireI haven't studied openings much, but as White, I usually do best to play 1. e4. I do not like it when my opponent plays the Sicilian, after which I usually play a closed variation. I understand something about Guioco Piano, Evans Gambit, and Two Knight's Defense, so I like to play those.
As Black, If my opponent begins 1. e4, I like to play the Caro-Kann. Usually with Nd7. Though I do not like to play against the Panov-Botvinnik. If my opponent plays 1. d4, I usually ignore all theory.
I don't mind playing the English on either side. I also don't mind if my opponent plays a hypermodern opening or an unorthodox opening.
92 ( +1 | -1 ) for awhile...I only played d4 as white, so as to avoid the sicilian and the french defenses which are both solid and pesky defenses. Lately I am studying on how to atack against the sicilian and french so I have switched to e4 again on many games. I play sicilian najdorf usually against e4, and lately have started messing with others such as Ruy lopez as black, also I love the petroff as black and have great success with it so far, started playing french defense as well, as so many players are poor positionally, they don't how to attack this opening. As far as d4, for some reason people rarely play this against me...don't know why.... though maybe it's because I play d4 very well as white. I haven't yet decided which defense to adopt, though I have failed miserably with the king's indian, and have switched to nimzo-indian or queen's gambit declined...
276 ( +1 | -1 ) I used I my me mine too many times but....I use the King's Gambit exclusively in response to 1...e5 I have been playing it for roughly twenty years now and find I win many games, especially over the board, just on familiarity with variations. The only variation which tends to give me some trouble is 3...Be7 which I believe is the Cunningham Variation.
I have spent the last few years trying to become as familiar with the closed version of the Sicilian and now readily welcome 1...c5 as opposed to years past at my club tournaments when I was routinely beaten by good players who could drag me into variations which packed some severe tactical punch and which they tended to understand very well. The closed: 1. e4, c5 2. Nc3, d6 (or e6) 3. f4... affords me flexibilty in determining what direction I wish to have the game go and seems to neutralize alot of the sting the Sicilian packs. It has worked well for me here against players who seem fairly strong.
Tending to be a stronger tactician than positional player I often lose games based on lack of understanding of pawn formations and exchanges in subtle defences. For this reason I don't enjoy strong players who respond with e6 or d6 to my e4. I am now experimenting with a response to the French by means of 2. f4 which has been met so far with d5 everytime and then I play 3 e5 (If anyone knows the name of this please let me know!) As you may have noticed I am comfortable with the positional understanding of games in which I have played f4. I have also experimented with the Alekhine-Chatard attack against the French but have yet to have any real success with it. As far as the Caro Kann goes I really hate to play against it. I seem to get beaten alot by counter attacks in the middle game probably due to a lack of familiarity with the positions which arise. I have yet to find myself in anything near to a transposition into something familiar in this opening. I generally waver between the advance variation and the Panov-Botvinnik attack depending on the strength of my opponent.
As Black I cant find an opening whcih allows me to get the same tactical advantages I would have as white. I tried the Latvian and many other gambits as black but was finding myself in some poor positions. So, I have resorted to responding to 1 e4 e5 2. Nf3 with Nf6 (to avoid the Ruy) and either played the the Vienna developing naturally and hoping for an error by my opponent or he or she plays 3. Nc3 and we go into the Three Knights game and I respond with 3...Bb4.
When I face 1 d4 I play 1...Nf6 and hope for the best. I find it rather easy to develop naturally from this position without too much knowledge of opening theory as long as I don't let white dominate the center due to my seeming indifference.
Gee, sorry this got a little long but it was good to talk some chess!
11 ( +1 | -1 ) My preference on opening movesis wrecking havoc with my knights. I really hate it when someone uses it against me, though.
36 ( +1 | -1 ) My personal preference.......is to start most (almost all) of my games as white with 1.d4 2.c4. I play for a local league team and in low level tournaments and find that d4 can put some people off as it is unusual for low level players to deviate from e4.
When confronted as black with 1.e4, I tend to reply with 1. .. c6 now as I keep getting destroyed by people playing King's Gambits against my e5!
132 ( +1 | -1 ) Caro-KannI play 1.-c6 myself too, and it's surprising how many people actually hate playing against it! I play Caro-Kann because it suits my style, and when I choosed it as my number one reply to 1.e4, I was actually pretty sure most people are happy to play against it! After all, there are many good choices suiting most styles - even agressive players (who seem to hate Caro-Kann the most) always have Panov attack (1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exc5 cxd5 4.c4), leading to a position where active piece play and e5-outpost compensate the weakness of IQP.
Perhaps the reason why so many players hate Caro is that it rarely leads to unbalanced or "messy" positions some players like? Or perhaps so many players have just picked the wrong variation? Two most popular choices seem to be 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.Nf3 (Advance variation) and 1.e4 c6 2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.d4 (Exchange variation - 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.Bd3 is the main line actually). Neither of these are really agressive and I strongly believe variations like Panov are more suitable for players who like to attack. Blitz variations such as 2.f4 are far from promising because the usual plan behind them (quick f5 and kingside attack) is bit too crude to be succesful against strong opponents. It might work against me though! :)