openings to destroy beginners
Sort:
Brian-Blundereraser
Oct 6, 2023
0
#1
Is the any good openings like that? I think only wayward queen attack is the only one.
Oct 7, 2023
0
#2
What do you mean by beginner (in rating perspective)
I don't think the wayward queen is going to destroy everyone, especially not people who play properly.
(If they play g6, well and good, you get a free rook, but a sizeable portion of beginners them play the kiddie countergambit, so it can't destroy all, you destroy players by gaining tempo and getting development and then go from there...
Why would you need openings to destroy beginners?
You need openings to stay in play against strong players.
Those same openings will be good to destroy beginners.
Trying to scholar's mate might work occasionally
Fried liver also works
Oct 7, 2023
0
#9
Hi!
Here attached the link to my post with my suggestion for beginners (rated under 1100): https://www.chess.com/blog/maafernan/openings-for-beginners
Good luck!
Oct 7, 2023
0
#10
BlunderfulBrian написал:
Is the any good openings like that? I think only wayward queen attack is the only one.
italian game: fried liver attack + jerome or haxo or deutz gambits
englund gambit
danish gambit
king's gambit triple lindy double dip gambit
ponziani
queen's gambit
GAMBITS!
the lower in ratings you go, the harder time your opponents will have seeing your threats.
if you REALLY want to take it to the next level, the danish gambit is quite sound, as far as gambits go, and can be a life partner if you never get to 2500. if you get THAT HIGH in ratings, you should have no problem finding "better" openings.
I love king's gambit, but danish is even more open and aggressive. I want to give it a try
Oct 7, 2023
0
#12
BlunderfulBrian wrote:
I want to destroy people who is 300-500
If you are 400 and want to destroy 300 to 500 players, I have some advice for you.
FORGET ABOUT OPENINGS FOR NOW!
Learn how not to hang stuff. LEARN YOUR ENDGAMES! It's not that your game will necessarily reach the ending, but if you can learn how to coordinate just a few pieces, you'll have a much easier time learning how to coordinate 16 pieces.
Do you even know how to win this with White to move? That is, WITHOUT USING A COMPUTER! Don't be a smarta$$ and use a computer and then chirp on here how you know so well. If you can't figure this out on your own in 30 seconds or less, you aren't ready for openings!
BlunderfulBrian wrote:
Is the any good openings like that? I think only wayward queen attack is the only one.
Not really any way that is completely sound.
If a beginner sets up their position to not get mated early, they can't be mated early. Similar to how stockfish can't mate us within a few moves.
It's not like boxing where the far better guy will deliver a knockout in the shortest time possible, chess doesn't work like that.
You have to be patient. If you go into an attack that is too wild, sacrificing pieces and so on, then a low-rated player could end up drawing or winning, especially in a long game.
Watch how high rated players play against low rated players on youtube - they admit the opponent has a good position after 15-20 moves often. There's no quick way to "destroy" someone straight out of the opening, you can try do something interesting like a queen sacrifice, that's it.
Oct 7, 2023
0
#15
llama_l wrote:
But yeah, for under 500, usually fast attacks against f7 or c7 are good enough to win some material quickly.
-
-
-
Either way, try to develop your pieces quickly and have a safe king.
To have a safe king, it's usually best to place (and maintain) a pawn in the center, and castle in the first 10 moves.
To "maintain" a pawn in the center, I mean if you can play pawn captures pawn, but after that you lose your center pawn, then don't do that. It's better to defend your center pawn with a pawn, that way when you recapture you still have a pawn in the center.
Center control and a safe king are two "hidden" elements to making your attack strong. Humans didn't really figure this out until Paul Morphy and Steinitz, so beginners often screw it up.
-
You are correct
