caro kann?
Looking for a solid opening for black
Sort:
Solid in nature are both the Caro-Kann and French. If you want to put your opponent out if theory, go Qd8 Scandi
Sep 1, 2018
0
#4
The Petroff Defense is perfect although you do have to be happy with a draw a lot of the time. If that doesn't suit you then the Caro-Kann is also strong
Sep 1, 2018
0
#5
The Scandinavian. The least amount of theory you'll have to learn to play a solid game of chess. It might not be the strongest opening for black, and theoretically white should hold maybe a half a pawn advantage, but it's tough opening for white to crack. Easy to play for black and with a bit of practice you can guarantee a fairly equal middlegame.
According to my experience with the Scandinavian, the games seem to take a very positional nature quickly, and are often decided in the endgame. There are few sharper lines that white can try to go for, but I think they are actually better for black (than simply liquidating to common Qd8 Scandinavian, which usually leads to a slow play).
Maybe you need a little practice with the Sicilian. You're less likely to get that practice in fast games though, so maybe try one of the openings the others suggested, and when you get the time, play a bit of a long game with the Sicilian.
Sep 1, 2018
0
#7
PIRC Defence: 1 . . . d6 2 . . . Nf6 3 . . . g6 4 . . . Bg7 5 . . . O-O or c5 (depends on tactical situation). GM Yasser Seirawan explains this in his book on openings and it used to be his favourite. He has a very good video about this on You Tube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJmjt9GGhA8 It's considered a "Modern" defence. Its advantages are there are very few lines to memorize and it is very flexible. It is all I have played since reading his book. Check it out. (There is also a PIRC club here on Chess.com.)
DeirdreSkye wrote:
Why don't you show us a game where you lost because the higher rated player knew more theory than you?
Higher rated players for you are 1600-1700, most of them know no theory. So you don't lose because of theory. You lose because they are better players and you hope that you will find an opening that will make you beat better players without actually improving.
There is no opening that can do that. If there was one we would all play it.
If you want to be a better player start with 1...e5 and play classical openings. They are called classical but they will actually excpose you to a variety of positions from classical to hypermodern and from open to close. I don't promise you better short term results but it will broaden your horizons and will allow you a long term improvement. Playing slow games and analysing them to find out what you are doing wrong will speed up the whole process. Maybe playing 2-3 slow games a week will allow you to pay blitz too and you will be able to learn and have fun too!
I don't play much chess on this site and when I do it isn't serious. Personally, I don't think playing games online is a very good way to improve. Anyways, i'll try to link a game later, as i'm currently at a hotel for a chess tournament and dont have any games handy on my computer. I'm currently hovering in the mid 1700s USCF so when i refer to high rated i'm mostly talking about 1900+ USCF. I also never said i lost only because of theory, I included that they calculate better than me. In many games I end up down a significant amount of time.
It's not that I want to beat higher rated players or even draw them, I just want to play a position that isn't so sharp. I may have implied something i didn't mean to, but i never explicitly said I wanted a new opening to be able to get better results, just to get a different type of position.
I'll look at the opening you guys have recommended, thanks
In a tournament starting on Chess.com today, as black I'll be using the 3...Qd8 Scandinavian, along with the 4...a6 Slav, and as white the London system. Against flank openings I'll head towards a London reversed. Can't get much more solid than that.
Sep 1, 2018
0
#10
By the way the Alekhine and the Pirc are not solid, not too sure why they were recommended 
Sep 1, 2018
0
#11
I agree with almost everybody.I play with black 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nf3 and i always return my queen on d8.Very easy to understand (i think) i need to castle or i will lose so the next few moves are easy to find
Sep 1, 2018
0
#12
Primal_Reaper wrote:
I play the Sicilian as black, but a lot of times i get crushed by higher rated players simply because they know more theory and calculate better than me. On the the other hand I have really good results with the Sicilian against people at my rating and below. Can anyone recommend a more solid opening for black, i'm looking for an opening that isn't extremely tactical(No opposite side castling, no attacks, ect.). Begin able to trade down to an endgame is good.
I know most openings have some attacking lines, and that's okay i'm just looking for an opening in which most of the lines are solid in nature.
edit: against e4 of course
Just choose a rare line of the sicilian, like the hyperaccelerated pterodacthyl.
If you don't want to spend a lot of time learning theory don't even try the pirc, alekhine, pretoff...
Sep 1, 2018
0
#13
BobbyTalparov wrote:
You want a defense that has no tactics and no attacks? You want to play Clue instead of Chess? In all seriousness, the opening is not your problem. Your tactical skills and thinking process are where you need to work.
Plenty of people play openings without attacks, there is nothing wrong with it. The endgame is chess too after all!
Sep 1, 2018
0
#14
BobbyTalparov wrote:
soni777chess wrote:
BobbyTalparov wrote:
You want a defense that has no tactics and no attacks? You want to play Clue instead of Chess? In all seriousness, the opening is not your problem. Your tactical skills and thinking process are where you need to work.
Plenty of people play openings without attacks, there is nothing wrong with it. The endgame is chess too after all!
You misunderstand. Virtually every opening line is based on some tactics, so if you are trying to play a defense "without tactics" then you are simply memorizing moves and not understanding them.
I was of the understanding that virtually every opening line was based around strategy
It's true that stuff like the Vienna Variation, Marshall Attack, Botvinnik Semi-Slav, King's Gambit etc is based around tactics, but what about all the openings like the Queen's Gambit, Italian Game, Nimzo-Indian etc - such openings make up the majority of openings that are played. The ideas are more about long-term strategy than short-term tactics.
Sep 1, 2018
0
#15
soni777chess wrote:
BobbyTalparov wrote:
soni777chess wrote:
BobbyTalparov wrote:
You want a defense that has no tactics and no attacks? You want to play Clue instead of Chess? In all seriousness, the opening is not your problem. Your tactical skills and thinking process are where you need to work.
Plenty of people play openings without attacks, there is nothing wrong with it. The endgame is chess too after all!
You misunderstand. Virtually every opening line is based on some tactics, so if you are trying to play a defense "without tactics" then you are simply memorizing moves and not understanding them.
I was of the understanding that virtually every opening line was based around strategy
It's true that stuff like the Vienna Variation, Marshall Attack, Botvinnik's Semi-Slav, King's Gambit etc is based around tactics, but what about all the openings like the Queen's Gambit, Italian Game, Nimzo-Indian etc - such openings make up the majority of openings that are played. The ideas are more about long-term strategy than short-term tactics.
Italian game gas A LOT of tactics and very sharp variations
Sep 1, 2018
0
#16
No defence or opening is perfect. If such a "beast" existed, everyone would play it and chess would be very boring, indeed. Many GMs have employed the Pirc from time to time, including Bobby Fischer v Borris Spassky in the '72 World Championship.
d6 is the 5th most popular reply to e4 (see openings on this site). If played too passively or improperly it can give White an advantage, as Black doesn't attack the centre or White's control of it, at least directly and right away. But it can yield good and exciting games for Black.
As noted above, it's the only opening I've ever used and I do ok for my level. That's why I think it's worth a look. And as GM Yasser Seirawan notes both in his book and the You Tube video, there aren't that many lines to worry about. Another benefit for lower level players such as myself is that few opponents are familiar with the Pirc - and as you can imagine that's an added advantage!
Sep 1, 2018
0
#17
Alltheusernamestaken wrote:
soni777chess wrote:
BobbyTalparov wrote:
soni777chess wrote:
BobbyTalparov wrote:
You want a defense that has no tactics and no attacks? You want to play Clue instead of Chess? In all seriousness, the opening is not your problem. Your tactical skills and thinking process are where you need to work.
Plenty of people play openings without attacks, there is nothing wrong with it. The endgame is chess too after all!
You misunderstand. Virtually every opening line is based on some tactics, so if you are trying to play a defense "without tactics" then you are simply memorizing moves and not understanding them.
I was of the understanding that virtually every opening line was based around strategy
It's true that stuff like the Vienna Variation, Marshall Attack, Botvinnik's Semi-Slav, King's Gambit etc is based around tactics, but what about all the openings like the Queen's Gambit, Italian Game, Nimzo-Indian etc - such openings make up the majority of openings that are played. The ideas are more about long-term strategy than short-term tactics.
Italian game gas A LOT of tactics and very sharp variations
I don't dispute that. The Queen's Gambit has even more tactics and sharp variations than the Italian Game. Just what I'm saying is that unlike the other stuff I mentioned like the Vienna Variation, they aren't based around tactics as their main goal in the opening, which is what seemed to come across to me from what the other commenter said.
Sep 1, 2018
0
#18
BobbyTalparov wrote:
soni777chess wrote:
Alltheusernamestaken wrote:
soni777chess wrote:
BobbyTalparov wrote:
soni777chess wrote:
BobbyTalparov wrote:
You want a defense that has no tactics and no attacks? You want to play Clue instead of Chess? In all seriousness, the opening is not your problem. Your tactical skills and thinking process are where you need to work.
Plenty of people play openings without attacks, there is nothing wrong with it. The endgame is chess too after all!
You misunderstand. Virtually every opening line is based on some tactics, so if you are trying to play a defense "without tactics" then you are simply memorizing moves and not understanding them.
I was of the understanding that virtually every opening line was based around strategy
It's true that stuff like the Vienna Variation, Marshall Attack, Botvinnik's Semi-Slav, King's Gambit etc is based around tactics, but what about all the openings like the Queen's Gambit, Italian Game, Nimzo-Indian etc - such openings make up the majority of openings that are played. The ideas are more about long-term strategy than short-term tactics.
Italian game gas A LOT of tactics and very sharp variations
I don't dispute that. The Queen's Gambit has even more tactics and sharp variations than the Italian Game. Just what I'm saying is that unlike the other stuff I mentioned like the Vienna Variation, they aren't based around tactics as their main goal in the opening, which is what seemed to come across to me from what the other commenter said.
In virtually every line of the QG, each side is either making a threat, defending it, or counter attacking something else. Same with Ruy Lopez, Petroff, Italian, etc. The point I was making is that there is no defense where you can just play without having to take your opponent's threats into consideration. Additionally, it is this fact that points to the OP's real problems: tactical skills and thinking process.
Now I see what you're saying, yeah sorry I misunderstood
CheesyPuns wrote:
caro kann?
Yes, I agree. It is very solid and what I believe is the best.
I play the Sicilian as black, but a lot of times i get crushed by higher rated players simply because they know more theory and calculate better than me. On the the other hand I have really good results with the Sicilian against people at my rating and below. Can anyone recommend a more solid opening for black, i'm looking for an opening that isn't extremely tactical(No opposite side castling, no attacks, ect.). Begin able to trade down to an endgame is good.
I know most openings have some attacking lines, and that's okay i'm just looking for an opening in which most of the lines are solid in nature.
edit: against e4 of course