Broad vs Narrow Opening Repertoire

Hello

In doing research for my opening repertoire I have found advice recommending both a broad and a narrow approach. If one sticks to 1 or 2 openings, he will have more experience with those choices and thus he will understand typical positions better and most likely perform better. This approach also requires much less time studying openings. On the other hand, it is easier for opponents to prepare something against his favorite lines. I am not so worried about this at my level, but I have also heard that playing a wider range of positions is better for over-all chess development. thus while a narrow rep. is better in the short term, a broader rep. will help you grow more. Being only 15, I am interested in my long-term chess prospects and have more time than adults may to study openings. Of course, I also do not want to play every single mainline opening. How would you handle this dilemma?

My current repertoire is, as white, primarily d4, but I have started trying to play e4, c4, and Nf3 a lot too. with e4 I only play 1 line vs each black defense, but with d4 I play several. as black I play the sicilian, caro-kann, and e5 against e4, and I may add the french. vs d4 I mainly play the nimzo/QID, but I have started learning the slav and gruenfeld and I am interested in the semi-slav and QGD. unfortunately very few people at my level play d4, so it is harder to build up experience with those openings. 

what are your thoughts?

To begin with your repertoire seems fine, for now. At this point of your development as a player, I would work backwards, i.e., see which type of middlegame positions (open, closed, tactical, strategic) you feel comfortable with and work it backwards: see which openings most likely lead to the type of game you like....

There is a happy medium.  A 6 opening repertoire is sufficient to build the "Brick Wall"  3 openings as White, and 3 openings as Black. 

In response to 1.e4, I play as Black (1...c5 Sicilian, 1...c6 Caro-Kann, 1...d6 Veresov's, and an occasional 1...Nf6 Alekhine's Defense).  Of course, transpositions by White into other openings are possible, so you have to know some transpositions.  In response to 1.d4, I play as Black [1...Nf6 (King's Indian Defense, Nimzo-Indian, Gruenfeld Defense), 1...c6 Caro-Kann, and an occasional 1...d5 Queen's Gambit(Declined), or Slav(Semi-Slav)     

As White I play (1.Nf3, 1.c4), which can lead into English, King's Indian Attack or Reti (1.b3, 1.g3) which can transpose, and the occasional 1.d4, 1.e4 

The time frame for building any kind of proficiency with 6 openings is a minimum of 3 years. 

If you have any questions about details, please let me know.

Your Black repertoire should be much more narrow than your White repertoire.  You need to know the critical lines of your Black repertoire inside out.  You can play a much broader range with White and don't need to have such a grasp of the White openings, since you can usually avoid a critcal line as White.   It seems to me that you are currently playing too many systems as Black, but I don't know how many years you have spent on developing them.

@himath2009: I am really not sure what my "playing style" is. I lose and win games to positional blunders and tactical blunders. I enjoy using a small positional edge to win, but I also love it when I get a strong attack going and win that way. I figure I am a universal player who is not so much good at everything as happens to win and lose in every way possible.

@ transpo: 1st q: could you explain the magic behind exactly 6 openings? 2nd q: is that 3 as black vs each white opening, or 3 total? 3rd: I see that you use far more than 6 openings. why? 4th: 3yrs at how many games per year? I can play up to 5 games a day at 15/10, but I rarely play anything longer and have never really been in an OTB club or tournament.

@kavanam: I have never seriously considered hiring a coach, although maybe I should. unfortunately my free time is not really in the same spot each day, so it would be hard to schedule.

@Blake78613: I have not realy spent much time developing these openings, my 8 month old chess.com account was my first real chance to play chess frequently against a human. Although I did use to play my brother very often, and he plays e4 every time, so I branched out to the sicilian and e5 because I was sick of the exact same caro kann position every single time! do you think this start narrow and slowly branch out is the best way? if so, how many games till I add another system? would it be closer to 50, 100 or 500? 

I guess it might vary from individual to individual, but it takes me about a year to really get a feel for a defensive system.  If you are getting sick of an opening then it probably is time to strart looking at something else.

You'll be a higher rating before people start to specifically prepare against your openings, not something to worry about. At that same level you will be able to expand your openings more easily and go deeper with them anyway.

I have enough confidence in my Black repertoire that I am not afraid of someone specifically prepareing for me.  If I got a draw or better as Black I am happy to repeat a game move for move and let them show me their improvement.  Now as White, I am always looking for a new move and don't generally want to repeat the last game.

hello transpo,

can u share the Skelton pgn files or make some lichess study ?/

"Broad vs Narrow Opening Repertoire"
++ As narrow as possible, so as to accumulate experience with it.

If you're not the very serious type of chess player, you could pick a solid opening that reduces the preparation work without having to worry about lines being prepped against you.

If you're anything like me your repertoire broadens naturally - you get fed up with one of your standard openings and fancy trying another. Then you always have that previous opening to go back to. For example, I now play Caro-Kann against 1.e4 and Dutch against 1.d4, but I was a French player for a long time, so my way into the Dutch is 1...e6, avoiding various anti-Dutch systems, because I'm reasonably happy if my opponent replies 2.e4.

For me, …. As black I go narrow and deep. I have one I play in tournaments and one other for club blitz games vs each major white try. As white I play several systems vs most black defenses. So as white broad and more structure based.    I think that if you play a tactically critical opening from either side, you had better know it well. If you play a closed, structure based system you will have a larger margin of error for fooling around.  Bill. 

I enjoyed looking into new openings and new ideas. Different tactics, different strategies, and different ways of thinking. I have my “main” repertoire with 1.Nf3, for example, but I’m happy with any english, double fianchetto, maroczy, and even open sicilian should the occasion arise when I want to play something interesting.

So while my current repertoire is somewhat “narrow”, I only settled on it after a long time “experimenting”. And it was fun! While I’m a hypermodern player, if I wanted to roll out a d4 or e4 to surprise my opponent, i have a simple repertoire for both. So I’m an advocate of knowing multiple openings.

The answer is a broad repertoire, but many mis-understand what broad means here.

What you don't want to do is have the exactly same position and play the same first 20 moves literally every game.  You wind up with the exact same pawn structure over and over and over again, and the positions start getting stale from your perspective.  You will start playing moves on auto-pilot, and not actually take the time to understand slight inaccuracies by your opponent, even if it is swapping move orders around where it could make a difference, or playing a Knight to say, e2 instead of f3, or d2 instead of c3.

HOWEVER, playing different openings does not mean jump off the deep end and try to play the Petroff, Najdorf Sicilian, and Alekhine.  Three openings that have nothing in common.  No!  That is not at all what I am saying.

The solution is to stick to one opening against 1.e4 and one opening against 1.d4.  What you don't want to do is stick to one narrow variation!

For example, if you play the Sicilian Dragon, learn both the traditional dragon (10...Rc8) and the Chinese Dragon (10...Rb8), and play both periodically.

If you are a Caro-Kann player, learn the 4...Bf5 line, the 4...Nf6 line, and the 4...Nd7 line, playing each periodically.

In my own case, I always answer 1.e4 with 1...e6, but you'll see the Winawer, Classical, McCutchen, and Rubinstein from me against 3.Nc3.

If you are a double King Pawn player, maybe you play the Traditional Chigorin Variation of the Ruy Lopez (9...Na5 and 12...Qc7) along with the line with 9...Na5 and a subsequent ...Nd7.

Same thing with your QP Defense.  If you play, say, the King's Indian, look at 7...Nc6 and 7...Na6 against he Classical Variation.  Maybe play both 6...e5 and 6...Nc6 against the Saemisch.  Maybe look at both 9...Re8 and 9...Bg4 against the Four Pawns Attack, etc.

If you are a Nimzo-Indian player, maybe learn both 4...b6 and 4...c5 against 4.e3.  Or both 4...c5 and 4...O-O against 4.Qc2.  Etc.

If you are a QGD player, maybe learn both the Tartakower and Lasker (they have many similarities, but are different enough to keep your game fresh!

If you are a Dutch player, maybe play both the Classical and the Stonewall.

DO NOT, however, play a whole bunch of random openings, one having nothing to do with the other.  For example, there is no reason to play the Slav and the Modern Benoni, or to play the Berlin and the Pirc.

Hope this helps.

Just going to add that I'm a bit guilty of this... I play the Czech Benoni and the Slav and far too many other things, and that's not working anymore xD

Going to focus more on the Semislav or Slav, I think.

My repertoire thus far has been wide, not deep, and that has worked until now. It may depend on how much you rely on openings!

the slav and semi-slav have worked well for me. Also I have found if white doesn't know how to play against the mean black can easily get a great position.