the Ruy Lopez

     Also known as the Spanish Game, the Ruy Lopez' strategic moves seem to have lost popularity.  Most players I have played here at Chess.com seem to do anything to avoid playing it for White. I have gotten the King's Gambit, the Bishop's Opening, the Vienna Game, the Scotch Game regularly, but no Ruy Lopez.  In my experience White keeps an advantage for a long time, as it is not that tactical for either side.  Not sure why it has lost popularity since Bobby Fischer played it.  It is good for White.

     Interestingly, I can think of 20 variations Black can play (mostly in the Closed Ruy Lopez), so for the player with Black it never gets boring.  Lose with one variation, try another.  Still no matter what variation Black plays, open or closed, Black does not usually have any clear advantage.  With all the chess databases going one would think White would play the Ruy Lopez a bit more. 

     There is a Ruy Lopez tournament coming up.  For those joining to learn more about it, White players can take a few shortcuts such as the Exchange Variation or the Ruy Lopez Four Knights, without going into the more involved lines of play.  Imagine all the chess engines will be ticking for this tournament.    

Next time I'LL play Ruy Lopez if you want.

there is like 3 varitons for black closed exchange open not 20 and its about 41% win for white-30% win for black -29% draw

To quote myself, quoting someone else, from a previous forum post:

A couple comments from C.J.S. Purdy on the Ruy.

Boiling water is the most efficent for washing dishes, but it will scald you if you're not very careful.  The Lopez is like that.  White has certain theoretical assets that he has purchased at the cost of development.  White must try not to give Black a chance to capitalize on his gain in development with a sharp attack-unless, as in the Marshall, White thereby gets a pawn or something, with a good chance of holding it.

Hove you noticed that the Lopez tends to win long games and to lose short ones?  There's a reason.  In the Lopez, White sacrifices development for long term theoretical advantages.  Sometimes Black's advantage in development tells quickly.

White plays the KG, Scotch, Guiocco, Vienna, Bishops, etc for a couple reasons.  One is it avoids a lot of theory.  If you find a Black player willing to go into the Ruy you are in for a fight as he obviously is prepared. Two, the lines cited tend to go tactical early.  If they succeed it is fun, glorious and short.  If they don't then it hits a quick equality usually ending in a draw.  At the higher levels, the tactics don't succeed and white has squandered his chance to win.  GM's do beat GM's with black but look at the numbers.  The best chance for a GM to win a serious game is as white.  Why give up the opportunity on an opening that gives Black an easier time of obtaining his goal, a draw.

     "White has certain theoretical assets that he has purchased at the cost of development".          This is very good C.J.S.

I know why White plays these other games without a doubt.

     "At the higher levels, the tactics don't succeed and white has squandered his chance to win".    This is good stuff too.

      "Why give up the opportunity on an opening that gives Black an easier time of obtaining his goal, a draw".  Not sure I agree with this point. 

At any rate the players I have encountered here are as far away from grandmasters as the man in the moon.  I am talking Chess.com

I am a beginner-intermediate (a novice really) and asked if the manner in which I was practicing the Ruy Lopez (or any opening) was a good way of doing it, alone at my board, moving both the white and black pieces from Shaun Taulbut's book, (or any chess book) trying to memorize the basic moves.

I don't want to be argumentative, but one or two advanced players said "forget the openings and learn the tactics of the game," I'm paraphrasing here but the words are pretty close. "Forget the Openings and learn the Tactics of the game?" But the game doesn't start in the Middle, it starts at the beginning.

Isn't "Forget the Openings... " bad advice to a beginner?

Oh, yes; and doesn't Kasparov still play the Ruy Lopez?

Just learning, so please help.

WTMAC,

  My comment is always this.  Some players are seeking the Universal Opening which Moses brought down from Mount Sinai with the Ten Commandments.  They spend a life time with the openings.  So learning tactics is correct, but only you would know if you need to learn more about the openings and not another person.  Many would advise you to pick out six openings and just play those.  No more than that.  Then you will know what to expect from the openings.  The seekers of truth abandon an opening because they lost a game with it, then go on to the next opening.  There is one secret about the openings.  You need to know what the chess ending will be from the particular opening.  So there is a continuity there.  Someone said that "between the opening and the ending there is the Middle Game" (and tactics).  Now before I leave the topic here is an example.  In the Grunfeld Defense, if Black survives to the end game (in the main line)  he should have a queenside majority of pawns (2-1) to try and force a new queen.  

I love the Ruy dearly, but it simply requires two much theory.  Besides, nobody plays e5 anymore.  Everyone plays something like the Sicilian and the French, which make the game more interesting.

The French and more so the Sicilian have as much theory as the Ruy.  That fewer people play e5 is a more valid argument but it might have to do with the level you are playing at.  Have you run into Brian Wall and his fishing pole?

I am talking about as White.  e5 is ugly and hideous as Black.  Throws any shot at equality out the window.  I am exaggerating.  But it IS my opinion

Well, it is far more important to learn endgames, tactics, middlegames, and opening principles than the opening. Someone who knows these moderately well and the opening not at all may lose a few games quickly to traps, but generally will survive long enough for that later advantage to pay off. I would say to learn a little bit of openings, but mastering the opening is just not the way you should start to prepare for playing chess. If you're playing serious, against someone who can survive, you have no chances, because you won't know how to convert any advantage or stop someone from converting theirs. And for fun, you will be bored by winning so quickly.

As for the Ruy, people avoid it because there is a LOT of theory, there are several defenses shown to be quite solid at holding a draw (like the Berlin and the Marshall) and the other moves can be more fun, tactical, exciting, suited to their style of play, etc. And Kasparov doesn't play it anymore, having retired. But just for example, he played it in his WC match with Kramnik in 2000, and won not a single game.

 W.W.

     A friend of mine (not really a chess player) played the Berlin Defense in the early 1970's, and that defense was always tough to crack (even against him).  The Marshall has been one of my top two defenses in the KP openings.  A bit more involved though.  Getting back to my original post, there was another guy (a USCF expert) back in the 70's who said the Marshall was the reason he switched to the Vienna game.  He was an early Ruy Lopez avoider.    

iTHINK,( sorry in my grammar ), the ruy lopez is dangerous in black, so the key ''you are white - and keep the middle D-E-F'', probably you'll have the pion or the game. for beginner or expert, if master i don't think so. one reference, you must analyze your character, to keep the first queen steps. because of the first queen steps. it's amazing style in attacker player style. because will increase yours depend.

i like the ruy lopez a lot.it is frequently seen in Gm plays like Peter Leko.

I love Ruy Lopez or Spanish game as white because of the fast development in the opening if black does respond with it's third move a6 forcing the light square bishop to move back or "recoil" because in the Ruy Lopez you want to keep that light square bishop alive if you kill the knight on c6 square with your light square bishop hoping to win a pawn on e5 to get up a point know that you'll need to transpose into something else besides the Ruy Lopez because you'll be getting away from it. With that said if black doesn't play a6 (which black should) white can castled on it's 4th move which is the quickest number of moves castling is possible.

oh dear me.  e5 is the critical move against e4, and far from "throwing any chance of equality out the window" it actually gives you the best chance of getting it.  If you cant beat black, which is hardest after e5, the game is a draw, which is equality.  c5 has absolutely nothing to do with equality.  Black doesnt care about equality, and instead deliberately opts for a dynamic inequality.  I think you are likely exaggerating so much that what you wrote actually no longer resembles your real opinion at all, which is I believe simply "I prefer other moves to e5 because I find it hard to get into the game with e5."

oh, and ninjalol there are so many different variations, not just 3.  Most of them are morphy defense variations, some are open, and some are the exchange and there are others.  Just in the closed I can think of the zaitsev, breyer, karpov, chigorin.  Then there are things like the berlin, cordel, cozio, steinitz, bird?!, schliemann?!, classical deferred, cozio deferred, modern steinitz, schliemann deferred.  Then white can choose things like the delayed exchange, the centre attack, the worral attack.  Far more than 3 variations.  You wouldnt say there are just 4 sicilians would you?  (open, closed, alapin, grand prix)

i once thought 1...-e5 was boring and always settles in an equal position, since i saw the spanish i actualy prefer it over the sicilian and others...

if anyone thinks that the spanish is boring then it's his loss, if you think about it, the spanish is probobly the first or second opening in the opening database moses recieved from god. so people should have respect! it took quite a while for people to find all the "boring" moves which seem to have no sense at first.

Here is my take on the move e5 in general.  The Ruy Lopez can give Black all sorts of fits, and if White knows what he is doing, he can create a strategically won game.  Against Bc4:  The Two Knights Defense requires a ridiculous amount of theory and practice is needed in order to prove compensation for material in some lines.  Bc5 leads to the Guioco Piano where White either can sac material for a dangerous initiative or play a boring game where he may not ever equalize, but come close to doing so.  Then you have to worry about the KG, Danish, Independent lines in the Scotch Gambit, Scotch, Bishops Opening, and others.  Talk about not breaking the symmetry at all.  White has a mouthful of different replies.  And after you learn all of that theory, we have to find a solid defense to d4 as well.

You're making things up again Beez.  White cannot create a strategically won game with the Ruy Lopez if black knows what he is doing.  If this were possible no GMs would ever play 2.Nc6 because they'd lose every game.  As it is, the Ruy is probably the most played opening atm.  The 2 knights defense is not best, and is essentially a sideline.  Bc5 is mainline, and is less troublesome than the Ruy.  From a practical perspective, you can use worrying about things as a reason, but not from an objective point of view.  You cant say "e5 is terrible because it leads to different openings."  There is much less theory to learn in e5 than in c5, and what's more it's easier and more forgiving.  You need to find a defense to d4 no matter what your response to e4.