Modern Defence - is it worth it?

Hello everyone!
I am a new chess player and I am interesting in this opening.
On the one hand, it looks very interesting, especially the position with flanchetto Bishop, on the other hand - this opening usually leads to totally closed game, where each move can make you lose.
What is your opinion about it? Is it worth mastering?

I would not recommend this opening for a new chess player (in any serious games) because of the space disadvantage. It is not easy to play for anyone when white has command in the center of the board. As black What you have to do is to counter-attack the center with your pieces and with well-timed pawn breaks, else either black's position crumbles or white's pawn wall pushes black off the board.

It is difficult even for good players to determine exactly when a pawn break is "well-timed", and have the understanding and ability to see that the result is good. If white overcommits and pushes pawns recklessly black can open the position in his favor, but if white takes control in a modest manner and slowly builds up it is not easy to defend for black.

I know I'm going to get flack for saying this; but as a new player, I don't think the modern defense should not be your first (or second) opening.

the problem with hypermodern are generally that they are cramped positions where a fine sense of positional common sense allows to break open the position at just the right moment to push a pawn to promotion or win material by tactical threats.

as a beginner, its not likely you've got enough tactical awareness to seize the right moment and break the position.  now, its true that against someone good; both you and I will likely suffer from tactical defeats IRREGARDLESS of our opening.

but, with a closed defense; you're letting the opponent (many times) seize the initiative and limiting the amount of tactical practice you get. 

if you play a more open classical opening you are practicing tactics constantly in a game;  you will earn neccesary defeats when you fail to see threats to your king; and tactics will be available if you can get your peice coordinated in an open position. 

it isn't the end of the world if you ignore the advice; and I'm sure you can win (against equal opposition) with any reasonable opening.  but some openings are easier to understand than others; and I think some openings are more straitforward and instructive than others.

What are your goals as a chess player? Answer that for yourself first.

If you want to push yourself to be the best player you can be, don't play openings that give such problems by move 4.

If you're just playing a board game, having fun and looking for small improvements along the way, play all openings and see what you like.

I've had some cool wins in the modern and some spectacular losses lol. Just remember to play in the center sooner than later. If you don't, you won't find the defenses in a cramped passive position

I think the modern is a trap for the beginner player. It lulls them into a sense of false security, as there are no immediate problems to deal with. But after 8-10 moves, the complexity of the position you reach is ten times what it would be in regular openings, and it may be very difficult for a beginner player to learn from them.

I forgot to add that the Modern Defense often transposes into the Pirc Defense, and probably other defenses, too (King's Indian Defense?). Like the hypermodern Zukertort Opening (1. Nf3), the Modern Defense is a noncommittal, deferred opening that doesn't commit to any pawn structure until later, which makes it difficult to learn since you have to learn all the openings to which it can transpose, not just one opening. In general, hypermodern openings (include also Alekhine's Defense 1. e4 Nf6) are probably not good for beginners, as others pointed out, since they give up the center for a while, which only strong players can do safely.

Modern defence is an amazing opening with many great attacking possibilities especially when playing against an english attack set-up! However, I have to agree that If you are a new player and you don't know too much it's better to start with something like the stanard 1..e5 or learn attacking chess with the sicilian 1..c5!!!

From a beginner's perspective this is pretty accurate. The positions aren't always closed but it can be difficult to find moves in these positions because you can't play them in the same way as you would play with 1.e4 e5 or something similar. What usually happens is that Black has to make significantly more difficult decisions than White and ends up playing moves that are either unhelpful or more commonly weaken the position. In other words it's way harder for you to play chess than the other guy because you have A LOT more ways to go wrong. 

This is usually why 1.e4 e5 or some other opening based around geting a pawn into the center is recommended for beginners. When you get more experience maybe you can come back to it but as a beginner it's kind of like trying to drive a Ferrari when you're still learning how to drive a stick: you'll look really awesome until it's time to change gears lol. 

Anyway if you are looking for openings this is a good place to start: http://exeterchessclub.org.uk/content/ten-rules-opening

I absolutely disagree with few of the comments regarding mordern defence here.

The obly thing i would agree to is that mordern defence is a bit hard to master for the beginner bcoz of the different opening it can transpose to.

Mordern defence is by any rule of the book one of the best openings for black. It has a weakness only against the three pawns attack which too can be mitigated by playing a variation.

I would just say that if you know in your heart the first possible 10 moves of this defence u cab beat IM s with it because it creates a cramped position and throws away the general rulebooks as applicable in sicilian or caro kann.

I have a 1150-1200 rating but i have beaten ppl lot higher in 1800,1700s with it that too not once or twice.

I can publish proof games.

So my advise is go for it. Learn the variations and good luck

im interested if a modern defense can get me a dragon like game with less theory to learn andrew martin claims that, does he want to sell something or is it true

the pseudo austrian attack alone looks so scary that i probably wont go for this

White can also tempt black into going into a closed silican with  1. e4 g6 2. f4. 

So it seems if you wanna study the modern defense, you need to study these other openings to. Closed silican has lots of play for white... gotta know what to do

My advice would be do some research and then try it out. Just watch out for this nasty trap that I fell into the other day. White sacs his light-squared bishop on move 2 and then checks with his Queen. Brutal if you're not aware of it. https://www.chess.com/live/game/3429352632

Hi

I also like to transpose the Modern into the Hippo

the modern is best for intermediate players. For beginners, its far too nuanced (even the pirc which is more systematic is hard to play) and for masters, it is just plain difficult to play well, it is a big amount of homework often differing by some subtle move order which makes all the difference when a pawn break or specific strategy is right or not, and in the end for all your efforts, you are still giving white a slightly more pleasant edge than the more mainstream defenses. 

club players can get away with botching the slightly different move orders, and still get fresh games. 

i would actually recommend 1.b6 over 1.g6 for players in the beginner to approaching intermediate level (1200-1500). The pawn structures are somewhat simpler, resembling, lines from either the french or sicilian and its themes are more obvious since e4 requires defending,and one will learn about timing 0-0 agaisnt possible attacks.

for a beginner? lol, you will confuse yourself more than learn from openings like these. most of the time. Just because you can pull it off doesnt mean its recommended.

pirc is the lesser evil, but only because there is more reliable formation building in the pirc, until like move 6 or 7. You experiment after castling usually.  Owen's being bad is something so repeated people actually believe it without suggesting anything concrete, and the critical lines are practically unseen prior to the 1800 level. Even if they somehow play them, they do so with enough lack of skill that you can get away with it, without being booked to the teeth.

Actually, the issue with modern is that its more like a complex of sidelines all having in common the king fianchetto than anything with a common theme. you can play it like a bizarre Caro, go for an early b5, go for c5 shenanigans etc. And which one to play depends a lot on white's development. Beginners have far too much on their plate already to learn to throw that wench into their learning regimen so soon.

yea but i have the little red letters XD