Portland, that is one of the problems in trying to play a drawing opening--your opponent may not fall in line with what you want to play and then you can be in trouble...
To improve your chess, one way is to learn to put pressure on your opponents and if one plays a drawish opening that they do not know very well--there is little pressure on your opponent.
Portland, that is one of the problems in trying to play a drawing opening--your opponent may not fall in line with what you want to play and then you can be in trouble...
To improve your chess, one way is to learn to put pressure on your opponents and if one plays a drawish opening that they do not know very well--there is little pressure on your opponent.
I agree with you on that point in all honesty. To actually play a solid game with the hopes of a draw is not an easy thing to do. I believe one of the last issues of Chess Life had an article about just this thing as well. It really requires not only some good tactical and middle/endgame understanding, but in a way sometimes, a little luck and some artistry as well.
I played a game against a former USCF expert (he stopped playing in OTB matches some 15 years ago due to health reasons but at one point was rated 2063 and is still very active in playing). We got into a position where I had a R+B+3p vs R+N+4P ending and yet it took me almost 10 minutes to find a drawing line involving picking up a pawn then forking King and Rook to end up in a B+3P vs N+3P ending. At this point, the draw was agreed (friendly game, no time control). In the game though, i racked my brain lokking for an advantage that was not there and almost missed the draw.
Sometimes I think it may actually be more difficult to play for a draw against a good opponent versus playing for a win.
The QGD is a perfect opening for playing for a draw, or a win.
Wanting a draw? No problem, answer the regular moves by 3...Nf6, and opt for either the Short variation against the exchange, or the Lasker against the QGD proper.
Going for a win? again no problem, you just have to study a bit more. Use the Alatortsev move order (3...Be7), and proceed with the Tartakower variation. The Tartakower is a superb opening, and also a great learning tool. Not my claim- I just copypaste the comments of a great KID afficionado, Efim Geller, who just loved playing the KID as black, but realistically, he felt that the Tartakower is the best way for Black to play VERY solidly, and yet, have fair winning chances.
Myself is a Nimzo/Bogo player for a lifetime, while I have also played other opeings, like the Benko, or the Slav. Nowadays, I just think I have wasted precious time, and I'd rather follow Geller's tips, and studied the Tartakower to more detail. The Nimzo/QID/Bogo are terrific openings, but they require being booked up all the time to employ them against serious OTB competition. I don't really have the time to keep myself booked up against these...
Hmm...I have to look into the Short Variation.
I had wanted to play the Tartakower QGD, but had not found something to my liking against the Exchange...it's SO popular nowadays, and very annoying to deal with.
I ended up playing the Nimzo/Ragozin by default because I wasn't satisfied with what I saw against the Exchange.
Playing an opening you know very well will get you better results than pllaying an opening you do not know as well--I think most would agree on on that statement. It is a start.
Very few players have the opening knowledge to being able to branch into two lines--one drawish and one you play for a win but also more chances for a loss--phren has that knowledge [and a lot of knowledge about many opening] but he is not your average player [understatement!]
He seems to be stating find an opening which you like and then get as much knowledge about that opening as you can and do not waste your time on openings you are not going to use in your main repertoire.
I agree with him on almost all points he just made.
John Cox in his book compares the Short variation against the exchange with the Berlin Wall variation against the Exchange Spanish. I had always avoided the exchange with the Alatortsev Variation, but I think I am going to start playing 3....Nf6. Not sure why it is called the Short variation, Boris Spassky played it, and Short started using it after training with Spassky for Short's match with Karpov.
Grunfeld is a great drawing weapon.
I would say play the Dutch, most people have no preparation for it, is a good weapon and can get you the initiative quickly.
How about the Goring Gambit 2 Pawn sac? Your opponwnr will think you are playing for a win and thus settle for a draw,,,
Hey guys, if a person is playing not to lose against 1. d4 which one should he/she pick?
1. Queen's Gambit Declined
2. Nimzo-Indian Defence and Queen's Indian Defence (for Nc3 or Nf3)
1 or 2?
If a person is playing not to lose....im not really sure ive never actually tried it.
seriously though id go QGD, its much more balanced and therefor offers less sharp complications.
Which one is safer against a computer, QGD or NID/QID?
The QGD is a perfect opening for playing for a draw, or a win.
Wanting a draw? No problem, answer the regular moves by 3...Nf6, and opt for either the Short variation against the exchange, or the Lasker against the QGD proper.
Going for a win? again no problem, you just have to study a bit more. Use the Alatortsev move order (3...Be7), and proceed with the Tartakower variation. The Tartakower is a superb opening, and also a great learning tool. Not my claim- I just copypaste the comments of a great KID afficionado, Efim Geller, who just loved playing the KID as black, but realistically, he felt that the Tartakower is the best way for Black to play VERY solidly, and yet, have fair winning chances.
Myself is a Nimzo/Bogo player for a lifetime, while I have also played other opeings, like the Benko, or the Slav. Nowadays, I just think I have wasted precious time, and I'd rather follow Geller's tips, and studied the Tartakower to more detail. The Nimzo/QID/Bogo are terrific openings, but they require being booked up all the time to employ them against serious OTB competition. I don't really have the time to keep myself booked up against these...
Hey pfren, thanks for your help!
So you think the QGD is safer than the NID/QID for black?
Usually a player rated under 1900 will only know a few openings very well or might not have even that much opening knowledge. I am suggesting to play an opening you are not very familiar with--even if it is drawish by reputation you will not do as well as if you played one of the openings you know quite well. Openings are very complicated--even the drawish reputation openings.
I am also suggesting that in this situation, You have won 2 or 3 games in a row and you are to play a high rated master--do not play for a draw on the theory that you must stay with the leaders going into the 3rd or 4th round. Instead play to win or at least play the best moves you can and this will put a lot of pressure on your very good opponent. And, who knows, you might even beat your worthy opponent, even a grand master!
If, say you get a draw and have 3 1/2 1/2 or 2 1/2 1/2 you are still going to be paired with a very good player.
The idea is playing for a draw puts no pressure on your opponent and if you just try and find the best moves and that includes at least trying to win--then you put pressure on your opponent regardless of his high rating and putting pressure on your opponents is the way to play to both get good results and to improve your own play.
[I know this seems to be a minority opinion]
I am suggesting to play an opening you are not very familiar with
That is bad advice in my rating category. Apparently you didn't read what I posted:
when I select an opening to draw with I go with an opening I know 35-40 moves deep in almost all variations including transpositions between variations and transpositions to other openings.
how do you know an opening that deep?
Where to find such theory??
how do you know an opening that deep?
Where to find such theory??
You will have to wait a wee bit for an answer from someone who hasn't visited the site since 8.5 years ago.
can you help?
d4 d5 is fairly solid, the regular Slav especially, and the Queen's gambit somewhat.
Otherwise 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 leading to the Nimzo (Nc3 Bb4) or the Queen's Indian (Nf3 b6)