Counter or defend?

Hello all you chess fans :)

I am a fan of playing as white, as many other people are, but when I play as black, I have trouble deciding if I should be waiting or attacking. 

Most of the time when I counterattack white, I find it hard because white had the first move advantage.

Please post what you think about this, and good examples of openings that should be countered and openings played by white in which black should definately stay on the defending side, and wait for a mistake.

Thanks,Punch

I LOVE playing black you can always react to what the wight player is doing, but u should always counter attack when you can, just be sure to plan them out so they dont back fire ^^

Wights? Where? RUN FOR THE HILLS!

(If you don't get that reference you need to read better books!  Then again, it sorta makes no sense if the wights are seelie.)

But I digress.

I prefer white, because I am absolutely awful at defending.

Wait, I'm bad at attacking as well.

I still prefer white.

The first move advantage is also a disadvantage.  The second player has more information as to what white is plotting-one of the reasons the sicilian is so effective. 

it all boils down to preference, style and choice of openings.

Players like Tal, Korchnoi, Kasparov and Fischer (Especially Fischer) have an affinity to play sharp, fighting openings with black like the Sicilian, KID and Gruenfeld. You need to play actively as black with these openings to avoid a quick death.

The Petrosian's and Karpov's on the other hand prefer more solid and quiet openings like the QID and Caro-Kann. They are also notorious for being very patient and known for slowly squeezing the life out of their opponents like boa constrictors. My suggestion is to study their games and take a look at their openings. Kramnik is a modern day Karpov/Petrosian so you would benefit also from studying his choice of openings.

Good luck!