Opening repertoire suggestions for a determined forty-something year-old patzer…

What openings (and resources) would you recommend for an adult forty-something who otherwise has very limited time to train/study (mainly tactics and endgame problems on a mobile device)? Would you recommend a very “narrow” repertoire or something more typically recommended for developing players (like classical openings or whatever experienced trainers would recommend to developing students)?  

Originally, I thought a very narrow repertoire would make sense given my time constraints: the London as White; the Scandinavian against 1.e4 (2…Nf6 to keep it narrower than 3…Qa5, 3…Qd6, or 3…Qd8); the Baltic Defense against the QG; and Avrukh’s Beating 1.d4 sidelines and Mikhalevsky’s Beating Minor Openings as references against 1.d4-sidelines, the English, Reti, and the flanks. But would such a narrow repertoire hinder whatever limited learning I could achieve over the rest of my declining years (I am in this for the long haul)?  Or would a narrow repertoire be better since I mostly train tactics/endgames anyway and only look at openings after I play a game (which isn’t very often)? 

Please note that I have read multiple opening “principle books”, specifically those written by Hertan, Emms, Mednis, and Tamburro (saving Hellsten for when I am more advanced), and have also Seirawan’s and Alburt’s opening books, so I would appreciate answers specific to the questions I asked above, unless you have a new penetrating insight that will change my chess study method forever…

Just as an aside, my guess is that infrequent playing is going to make it difficult to make progress, no matter what.

[COMMENT DELETED]

Narrow sounnds right to me under the circumstances, but it should perhaps be mentioned that limited experiments with variety are possible. For example, Silman mentions

https://www.chess.com/article/view/how-to-understand-openings

the possibility of combining Colle and London ideas in one's play as White. If I remember correctly, there is this Icelandic Gambit thing that one may or may not use in the Scandinavian.

I'm older than you in a very similar situation.  

Quite the dilemma:  Narrow repertoire  (time constraint) versus long term growth for the long haul.  

 

I've chosen e4 for tactical growth along with the classical e5 and QGD because I'm a Patzer. 

 

Moreover I'm starting with Morphy when it comes to master games. 

 

I chose to build the foundation on classical historical footings even though time is short.  Quite possibly foolish.  And I readily concede that being pragmatic with a more focused narrow repertoire might really be the better way to go.

 

Great question, Mr. Hume!

Limited time at 40 => narrow repertoire will give better results (if results is what you're after).

A very well-thought busy adult repertoire is Nigel Davies' offering :

http://tigerchess.com/courses/building-an-opening-repertoire/

Not going to be much help here, but i think your approach repertoire is already excellent and well suited. It's not too narrow. I personnaly play 1...Nf6 vs 1.d4 then improvise depending on my mood and opponent (queens indian, king indian or nimzo). I also play the London, sometimes the english. And, as you, the scandinavian with 2... Nf6 against e4

I, speaking as an expert, highly recommend not taking the approach you are taking.  I also speak as one in my 40s (43).

 

With limited time, I would recommend not playing multiple openings, but would recommend openings that mesh well, where learning and mastering one type of pawn structure would help both defenses to e4 and d4.  You should be ok as White as long as you learn something against the Modern Defense.  Even the king of the London, Lakdawala, says in his own work that you need a different line against the Modern because Black forces through e5 too easily.

 

As Black, it depends on the types of positions you prefer.

 

If you do best with blocked centers where the play is on the wings, I recommend the French and Kings Indian.

 

If you do best in static positions that are somewhat closed but not completely blocked, I recommend the Closed Ruy Lopez and Queen's Gambit Declined.

 

If you prefer positions that are wide open, and you can handle isolated quien pawn situatuons, I suggest the Petroff and Tarrasch.

 

Lastly, if you do well giving white a big mobile center and bank on chipping away at it and white overextending, there is the Grunfeld and Alekhine.

 

It your level, dynamic type centers that result from the Sicilian or Nimzo Indian are probably way too complicated.

 

 

You are better off with a few extra lines in openings that mesh well together than a few less lines in two openings that have nothing in common other than the fact that they pertain to the game of chess.

 

Hope this helps.

 

By the way, I practice what I preach.  While I occasionally play something else because of high frequency, my bread and butter, and what I play at major tournaments, is the blocked structure, French and Kings Indian!

Limited time at 40...wow. I just turned 45. It seems like such a bleak way of looking at things. I guess none of us are guaranteed any tomorrows. Should we all just study tactics and play chess960? Life's too short to study openings...lol. 

You can always buy 100 opening books and end up using less than 5 of them.

Lots of people, including me, have followed that path.

Similar problem here, ie age and work + family commitments. I have settled so far with these and am on my refining it through playing one slow game a day if I can.

As white: London system

As Black: against e4, the Caro-Kann. Against d4, one of the Indian systems (Nimzo, King’s and Bogo)

That’s it.

As for resources, I bought the ChessBase DVDs and some Everyman Chess books on this opening. For the London, I read The Agile London System. I also got a copy of chessbase14 and the related opening books for these opening so that I can check the lines or get some ideas.

I will work on these and try to play well with these opening which should satisfy me for some time in my chess journey.

In order to make a really well-balanced choice of your opening repertoire, we should also know your height, weight, sexual orientation as well as your Zodiac sign! 

Food for thought...

Some opening repertoire suggestions by GM Nigel Davies and IM Andrew Martin:
Martin's repertoire....
http://www.chesspublishing.com/content/repert.htm

Davies' repertoire...
http://www.chesspublishing.com/content/repert2.htm

The following articles relate to choosing an opening repertoire...
http://www.mark-weeks.com/aboutcom/aa02i07.htm

http://grandpatzerchess.blogspot.com/2007/03/openings-for-improving-players-part-1.html

http://grandpatzerchess.blogspot.com/2007/03/openings-for-improving-players-part-2.html

http://grandpatzerchess.blogspot.com/2007/03/openings-for-improving-players-part-3.html

 

Is your goal to get tournament results in the short term or improve your game (a more long term strategy)? What is your current playing level? Answers to both questions affect how you should approach openings.

Thanks for the link, I enjoyed it.  Yes, you are correct... I am well aware that I don't/can't play enough to optimize my learning or, even technically, to allow my rating to accurately match my playing strength.  I am more interested in becoming an overall stronger player with a balanced understanding of chess as best as possible.

I didn't mean to sound like a downer... I do believe significant chess learning can continue into the golden years, but I wanted it to be clear to others that I understand the challenges of the royal game, and am not someone posting "Which gambits should I memorize to move 30 to become a GM in 5 years?"

Thanks, ThrillerFan, for your detailed honest answer (and BobbyTalparov for the second).  I will say this... as much as I talk and argue about openings, I hardly look at them and so I really don't know what style I would prefer.  Really, I will play anything that I think has well-written and fairly comprehensive resources and isn't insanely dubious. 

I have looked at the KIA/KID/Pirc because that comes up often when one searches for universal openings... many players have advised against it for me (well, against the KID/Pirc, not so much the KIA), saying the positions are too complicated and, as Black, a lower-level player will be in the uncomfortable position of having a lot less space.  

The narrow repertoire I posted was a suggestion by a master a while back who knew my schedule limitations, but was struggling to figure out what may be better for adults with other obligations. the gist of what he suggested was...

Wedge patterns are easier to learn, hence the London as White, the Scandinavian (he suggested 3...Qa5) is "simpler" than the Caro-Kann, and the Baltic is a reverse London, not so great, but certainly fine through the higher club level players.  But "ideally", he wanted me to go the route of Ruy Lopez as White, 1.e4 e5 and Nimzo against 1.d4 as Black, etc, to get exposure to "a variety of pawn structures and strategic plans."

Thanks for asking, chuddog ... I definitely want to improve my overall game for the long-term rather than achieve a short-term ratings boost that quickly peters out, especially since I can't really play enough to get an accurate rating anyway.  

Currently, my USCF rating level is just under 1200 OTB (USCF), but in my last tournament this past fall, I decided to use ALL of my clock and didn't lose any games, avenging 2 prior losses, semi-avenging another (a draw against the winner of the low-rated section, who is now rated 1370 and had crushed me in miniature-fashion months earlier; he took first place in that section, because I took a half-point bye in one round), beat another guy who is now rated in the 1500's, and increased my rating over 100 points.  I now have nearly an even record against players rated 200-300 points higher than me in the last 2 years.  

My long-term goal, if I maintain good health physically, is to be a high class B player (a solid 1750) by the time I fully retire in hopefully 2 decades with a balanced club-level understanding of openings, middlegames, and endgames, a consistent tactics rating around 2100, and a good study plan so I can hit the ground running that day I can start devoting a few hours daily to chess.   

 

Those positions are NOT similar.  A common mistake people make.  The position is determined by 16 pawns and 16 pieces, not 8 and 8!

 

Similarity comes in the form of blocked, closed, open, etc, not what squares the black pawns are on.

 

Take the French and King's Indian.  In one case, Black's pawns are on light squares, the other dark.  In one case, black has a queenside attack, the other a kingside attack.  But look at the center and the similar concepts to both:

 

1. The center is blocked.

2. Both sides attack on the side in which Thier pawns point

3. Both feature a bad bishop for Black and understanding that they both often play a vital defensive role and become a major attacking force if they open up (light for three French, dark for the Kings Indian).

 

The 2 openings play in very similar fashion.  The Kings Indian and Pirc are comparing pineapples to mud wrestling!