Is it OK to play the same openings over and over again?

I have listened some strong players (GMs and Teachers) recommend to play the same openings and focus on mastering them until you have a decent rating like 2k ELO.

What do you think about that?

Im at that point where if I play any other opening rather than my favorite ones, I feel like Im lost in the position very early, I really don't know the following up plans, the tricks and common tactics, you know, I can loose the game pretty quickly if Im not super carefull. And thats totally understandable, what Im not sure is if Im doing the right thing just playing the same openings over and over again.

I think they mean it more like playing if you play e4 you should do it everytime. Not c4, d4, e4 depending on the day and mood. They want us to learn the patterns and middlegames when we stick to the same opening. I am currently playing Kings Gambit. But I can't play it against c5, so we need to have different ways to respond. In that matter I would say for example The London System is more flexible since you will face less different openings.

Oh that make sense. Well then Im a d4 player as white, and I will stick to it for a while. Sometimes Ive tryed c4 and e4 but as you said, its not good.

i think it’s ok; we dont have to worry about playing into prep and all that jazz yet; part of the reason why i play the same openings is to narrow the focus of my opponents responses into territory i am somewhat familiar with

i used to play e4 but was getting smoked constantly but opponents at my chess club they all had their grooved responses whilst every game for me was new territory; especially against sicilians

so i switched to 1d4 and though better players still have their responses i feel like this is a better fit and is easier for me to “play chess” vs when i played 1e4


i play ...d5 vs 1d4 and ...c6 against everything else; again this channels white’s responses into territory i have more familiarity with and win, lose, or draw the info learned gets filed into these specific patterns

dont get me wrong; better players and more experienced players still destroy me or anyone for that matter if i goof up but feel that just with this minimal opening play i am slowly but surely getting more familiar with pawn structures; positions; plans and whatnot

i dont think i would be able to do this if i kept alternating openings

That is absolutely right. If you want to improve, you must master typical pawn structures, middlegames and so on. If you keep changing openings all the time, you'll be getting unknown middlegames, and wouldn't be able to learn systematically. If you want to learn more, please check out my new YouTube channel, where I share master's secrets for free! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjzbPjAk6T87ZgaIxUX-aEg/ Also, consider reaching out to me regarding the private lessons. Hope that finds you well! 

you are quite right! i knew the Poisoned Pawn Najdorf like the back of my hand and beat players a few hundred points above me regularly with it. not that i spend time staring at the back of my hand.

 

Improve in what? Are you referring to 1-2 min games which is all the OP plays?

I think you are new to the forum lol.

 

 

So you’re saying that one needs to peer into every OP’s profile and game archive to be a forum veteran.

I don’t know. I thought we’re supposed to focus on what people say rather than who they are in a forum thread.

I am only a low rated player but i found that playing the same openings in 60 min time control for a couple months really helped me to learn some typical ideas.

I switched it up after that period and faced something of a setback, but have stuck with the new openings and begun to improve again. 

One of the reasons I switched it up was simply that I wanted more diversity in my games where I was playing up to 3 games at 60 minute time control per day and I am playing for fun. It really depends on what kind of ambition you have. It is ok to take the game as seriously or a casually as you wish. Chess is a banquet and I want to try a little of everything.

+1 

If you stick with your favorite openings/repertoire, then opening preparation is easier, but learning several openings teaches thematic plans, pawn structure and many other ideas that help you improve as a more rounded chess player. 

I recommend learning many openings and experimenting with them. They don't need to be repertoire choices, but it can be good for casual games or to mix it up in a series of games against the same opponent. As a bonus, many players only learn one response only (their response) and so taking these players out of book sometimes makes them play several hundred points worse than their rating (since they are out of their element). At my local chess club, one player annoyingly plays the same openings constantly and so their next opponent (who knew this fact) played the Englund Gambit against them, despite the fact that they normally don't "play such trash" (opponents' words; not mine). The player who plays the same openings over and over was crushed by the Englund Gambit by falling into a common book trap, despite how someone several hundred points lower could have realized the danger.

In short, don't be a one-trick-pony and learn at least a few openings from each side - even if you do not choose to play it in your repertoire. Having at least seen these other motifs will make you a stronger player and also less susceptible to opening traps that you would have otherwise not found out about.

 

It depends on the opening.  Many openings are wide enough to where you could be a lifetime player with success.  You don't want to play the exact same position over and over and over and over again.  Keep in mind that they don't say always play the same variation, they say the same opening.

 

That does not mean that you should always play line 3A2b6 of Chapter 14 of Book X every time.

 

Keep in mind that openings like the Grob or 1...h6 are garbage, but if you play one of the "big 4" against 1.e4, observe the following:

 

1...e5 - You can play the Chigorin, Breyer, Zaitsev, Open, Marshall, Berlin, etc just in the Ruy Lopez alone.  Then you have the Petroff.  Against the Scotch you have 4...Bc5, 4...Nf6, 4...g6, etc.  Against the Italian you have 3...Bc5, 3...Nf6 (Two Knights), 3...Be7 (Hungarian), etc.  So plenty of material such that you can make 1...e5 a life-long commitment.  Maybe play the Zaitsev for a while, then go slower to a Breyer.  Maybe play a few Petroffs, etc.

 

1...c5 - There are numerous Sicilians out there that you can easily find 2 or 3 that you wouldn't mind playing.

 

1...e6 - Against 3.Nc3, you've got the Winawer, Classical, McCutchen, Burn, Rubinstein, etc.  Against 3.Nd2 you have 3...c5 and 4...exd5, 3...c5 and 4...Qxd5, 3...Nf6, 3...a6, 3...h6, etc.  Against the Advance you have 5...Qb6 lines, 5...Bd7 lines, 5...Nh6 lines, etc.

 

1...c6 you have 3...Bf5 and 3...c5 against the Advance, you have 4...Nd7 and 4...Bf5 against the Classical, 5...Nc6, 5...e6, 5...g6 against the Panov, etc.

 

 

So yes, you can play the same "Opening" without playing the same lines over and over and over again.  While I have played other openings, most notably the Petroff recently, I can and have played the French for years on end, including the Rubinstein, McCutchen, Classical, and Winawer against 3.Nc3, Open Tarrasch, Closed Tarrasch, Rubinstein, Advance with 5...Qb6, Advance with 5...Nh6, etc.

 

 

The reason this is a good approach is that playing various lines of the French diversifies the positions you see without having to understand two completely different openings.  There is a major difference between trying to play the Alekhine and Berlin defenses, and trying to play multiple variations of one opening.

I agree with ThillerFan.

Sorry for spelling your name wrong

Problem with chess is you nearly always have to wait for everyrhing. Impatience is rarely rewarded in this game.

Indeed. Like with anything, you have to invest some time to building your brand: namely your opening repertoire. As one poster said, he switched to 1.d4 when he noticed he wasn't altogether happy with opening with 1.e4. Indeed2, playing an opening repetitively without really being comfortable with the positions isn't productive either. If you have doubts, then all means "switch it up". Heh. But then again, going into another opening without due diligence is also ineffective (to me) in the long run. Geez, I've always preached to all the importance of getting together your own personal repertoire early-this is a marathon, not a sprint guys. Success will only come in time. Best wishes

If you are intent on spending hours every day with chess to achieve a 2K rating, then it pays to stick with the same openings for a long time.

If you are like me and only play an hour or two every few days, it also pays to really understand a limited repertoire of openings so you'll remember and understand them in detail.

BUT, even though, as Black against 1 e4, I play the Caro Kann (1 e4 c6) most of the time, I've been playing the Sicilian Defense (1 e4 c5) lately for variety. I like the Taimanov Variation (2 or 3 ,.,,e6), often called The Safest Sicilian and may play it more often.  I also played the Ruy Lopez in a game (1 e4 e5 etc.) as Black.

So you should have a favorite, works-best-for-you limited set of openings that you play in key games, but have some fun too and experiment - you might find something that suits you better as you improve in rating and face stronger opponents.

That's actually a pretty interesting question. The advantage to playing the same opening all the times is that you will generally know the positions at least as well as your opponent. Not, because you have memorized a bunch of moves, but because you understand the basic ideas and you are familiar with all the positions that typically arise form your opening. This can be a big help, both over the board and on the clock

On the other hand, chess is a very rich game! There are many opening systems, each with its own history and set of ideas and critical positions. Why go to a great restaurant if you are just going to order the same dish every day? Do you really want to eventually meet your maker having played only one opening all your life.

My totally unqualified suggestion is that that you have a number 1, go-to opening, but that you also devote some time to learning a quite different opening and gradually start playing from time to time, As you get more comfortable, you can play it more often. Maybe it will become your new number one, maybe it won't, But you will learn a lot of chess in the meantime and become a little harder for people to prepare for

Sure, why not? Fischer and many other Grandmasters from the past and even in the present do this to a large extent. I have a collection of all of Fischer`s games and what is particularly interesting to me is the chapter on the evolution of his searching on how to handle Black`s replies to his 1 e4. I also largely agree with posts #18 and #19.

And I agree with you!

I am a beginner since a couple of months back. And I realize that restricting your opening repertoire in the beginning and focusing your efforts will yield better results and allow you to focus on other things like middle game and end game. But for me, I just can't stand the idea of not knowing what kind of openings are around. So, I study one opening per week or so now to build an overall understanding of the different concepts out there and to get an idea of what kind of plans the different openings bring. Also, it gets boring to play the same thing over and over again.