Stonewall opening

I am just getting into theory as I never have before and I find this opening pretty successful for me. Sure I have a low rating and some openings/defences are incredibly nuanced. I enjoy it as it can be played from both sides and while is does block in one of your bishops it can be a bit frustrating as I am not used to that. I like it as it forces exchanges to make room for yourself (something I am not good at).

So are there any particular openings/defences that you higher ups find yourself using more often?

I’ve looked into Sicilian but it’s somewhat complex for someone at my level. I think the only thing that truly stuffs up a stonewall is the order in which you utilise moves and that the move e5 (for black if you are playing white) totally ruins the whole thing. The analysis of my games kept saying ‘e5 is best’ for my opponent. Makes sense.

Stonewall is a fine opening that you can use at all levels. But you still need to have an answer as Black against 1.e4. French 1..e6 or Caro-Kann 1..c6 has some semilarities with the Stonewall. 

you don't have to take up very complex openings now, but also you don't want to settle for crutches you will easily outgrow and have to throw away without any future benefit or utility. go for something direct with some central tension initiated by you, especially if you are white.

I’ve been using King and Queens pawn (black or white) and taking out both my Knights as the norm. It’s seems simple, you control the centre, both bishops are open, castling can be done quickly etc. It seems to work well most of the time though I find I end up ignoring pawn structures. With this play I often go for the weak f7 pawn if playing white. At my level this is usually an easy way to capture a rook. If you lose the Knight attacking the weak pawn and winning a rook I’m pretty happy with myself.

Now I know this is a stupid question by definition but I’m going to ask it anyway. For all you higher ups what opening/defence did you play in the beginning. Something reasonably straightforward and good for people at my level. Some openings seem extremely complex as there are so many iterations depending on what is countered. Just trees upon trees of move sets dependent on what the opposition does.

I’m not going to ask ‘What’s the best opening’ as this obviously depends.

Anyway. Cheers for the advice 🙂

The whole point of Stonewall is to prevent white from playing e4 or black from playing e5. All of your moves are aimed to prevent e4: ...f5 ...d5 ... Nf6 ... Ne4. If white can play e4, then you have done something wrong. 

I began with 1.e4 e5. Everybody at my level played this. And I would generally recommend to get a feeling of these positions befor moving on to something else. 

Later I actually for a long period played the Stonewall with both Black and White, and still enjoy playing it with Black on and off, with fine results.

As a player you are recommended to follow the same development as in chess history. That is 1.e4 e5, and 1.d4 d5 (or 1..f5 ) and not 1..Nf6, as these (so called Hypermodern) opening a more difficult to understand. Strategy: Get a pawncenter and develop! 

You should not focus on openings and play what is natural, like a baby becoming left or right handed.

 

I played a ton of blitz for a semester in college, eventually asked if what I was playing had a name.  I was told "yes, that's the French Defense".  That was 1995.  Those that know me from these forums - What opening do I truly know like the back of my hand?  The French Defense!  I have played almost everything under the sun and the French still makes the most sense to me because it came to me naturally.  Obviously back then I did not know 25 moves of Winawer theory, but the structure in general came to me naturally.

 

That is what you should be doing.  Focusing on middle game and endgame books, and during that time, play what comes natural to you and later on find out if what you have been playing is an actual opening.

 

Everyone's brain is wired differently.  Just because the French came naturally to me does not mean it will come naturally to others, so asking others to make opening decisions for you is not good advice.  It would be like me telling a diabetic to eat cotton candy (100% sugar) if I like cotton candy (which I don't, but my daughter does).

The Stonewall Attack...

https://www.chess.com/blog/RussBell/stonewall-attack

https://www.chess.com/blog/RussBell

On a philosophical level, I have a really hard time with someone choosing the stonewall attack as white. In my opinion, the chess gods didn't give white the first move advantage just so they start playing passively at move 2. I almost get excited as black if white plays it, because as long as black works fast to breakup that pawn structure early, black actually has a decent game.  In answer to your question about beginner openings, I don't know that I would avoid certain openings just because there is a lot of theory or a lot of variations, especially if you are primarily playing daily. I think openings where there are lots of options like the Sicilian, Ruy Lopez, Italian Game, or French Defense can be liberating (compared to say the King's Gambit) because if you don't remember the best lines, you will probably still be ok. As long as you are playing people around your level, the "complex" openings will be just as complex for them as for you.

Hnmm. Interesting. I knew that black could play a stonewall against white playing one, but I didn’t know it was better for black.

Thanks for the advice everyone. I really appreciate it! I I find playing double Knights with king and queen pawns is my go to and generally (well, at least half the time) I come out on top. Like you said it controls the centre and brings out my favourite pieces (the Knight). Yes, I know it’s not the best piece and would happily trade one for a rook.

I guess my point is that for me playing this way leads to a good start and if I play naturally from there I tend to do ok (half the time like I said)

When higher rated players declare that an opening is “bad”, instead of blindly accepting it as irrefutable fact, I suggest to take a few moments to reflect on why they might say this. A common prejudice is that the higher rated the player the more they tend to disdain openings which are rarely played at the very highest levels. That is, if Grandmasters don’t typically play it, then it must be bad.

It is a fact that at the beginner-novice level and even beyond, chess games are not lost primarily because of the opening played. Games are more likely to be lost because of either poor chess play or that your opponent simply played better.

It is also true that some openings are easier to play than others. For example, the themes and plans of the Stonewall Attack (in the present case) are more straight-forward than openings that have been analyzed to death over the centuries, with mountains of documented theory. Examples of this are the Ruy Lopez, and the Sicilian Defense.

The flip side is that for advanced (and especially titled) players the easier openings to play also tend to be the easier to defend against (not always, but in many cases).  Advanced players tend to prefer the more difficult openings because they are also more difficult for their opponents to play. So the player that is more “booked up” on a particular opening is more likely to have an advantage out of the opening, and at the highest levels this advantage can be decisive because these players don’t typically make the plethora of mistakes in the remainder of the game that one finds at lower levels.

Particularly at the beginner-novice level these kinds of issues are not as critical, for several reasons. First, at these levels the competition will typically not be familiar with many openings, especially those that are infrequently played, and will be less likely to know how to best defend against them. Thus, if you are more familiar with the themes and plans of the opening of your choice than your opponent is, you should be more likely to enjoy an advantage relative to your opponent out of the opening, even if that opening is not one that is frequently played at the highest levels.

Bottom line - at less "advanced" levels there is no reason not to play an opening if it suits your style and you enjoy it. Particularly if you have studied it, understand how to play it and your opponents do not.  And if you do find yourself losing when playing a particular opening, make an honest determination of whether the fault lies with the opening, or with yourself.

I recommend to check out this instructive quick tutorial on the Stonewall...

Learn the Stonewall Defense & Attack | 10-Minute Chess Openings - GothamChess
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_brAnORWGw

I find myself using modern defense and 1.Nc2/Nc6 more often but that’s just me