Why do you play the English opening?

Why do you play the english opening (1. c4) instead of 1. d4 or 1. Nf3?

I find that if you choose not to transpose to a d4 opening, that English games tend to follow long-term strategic plans better than most other openings.  If you favor that sort of a contest over an early tactical melee, I think c4 suits.

On the other hand, if you DO like to use it as a transpositional weapon, opening with say 1.c4 2.Nc3, then it allows you to play the more aggressive d4 openings, without forcing you to deal with the Nimzo.

So after 1.c4 e6, 2.Nc3 d5, you can push d4, and still get a favorable QGD exchange.  Whereas after 1.c4 e6, 2.Nc3 Nf6, you can keep it in independent waters if you choose.

I see.

What about 1. Nf3 in comparison? It can also be used as a transpositional weapon but also as an independent opening can't it? What's the difference? Which is sharper and which is slower?

Well, 1. Nf3 is almost purely transpositional in modern praxis.  (Mind you, "almost.")

Very, very generally, when you talk about transposing with either 1.c4 or 1.Nf3, you're talking about transpositions into 1.d4 type games.  And more specifically, into games which would otherwise begin 1.d4 2.c4 3.Nc3 or 1.d4 2.c4 3.Nf3.

The first set (those with 3.Nc3) includes opportunities for the Ne2 QGD exchange, the Samisch or 4-pawns KID, the Taimanov/flick-knife benoni, the Marshall against the triangle/semi-slav, the Geller gambit against the slav, and the like.  On the down side, it also allows the Nimzo, which is often considered black's strongest possible reply to d4.

The second set can see you forced into less overtly aggressive QGD's, and benonis that set your opponent fewer problems.  It limits your choices against the KID (though aggressive options remain).  But instead of Nimzos, you're looking at QID's (and more QGD's) against the e6/Nf3 crowd.  All in all, the games from this second set have a much more positional flavor.  This isn't necessarily bad...just may not suit one's particular style of play as well.

And naturally, at low-to-middle levels of play, any game can turn tactical in a heartbeat.  But if you get to the point where you're playing mainlines 20 moves deep, or you aspire to get to that level AND want to use your current openings to get there, so that when you do, you'll be well versed in them, then generally speaking the complex of games that arise from Nc3 "tend" to be more tactical than Nf3 games.

FWIW, people do all kinds of gymnastics to avoid Nimzo's, on the pretense that it increases their winning chances if they can avoid it.  I love playing white against the Nimzo.  I almost always end up in double-edged, hotly contested battles.  Which, yes, I lose my fair share of.  But the enjoyment more than makes up for that.  (Incidentally, this is the same reason I enjoy the open sicilian as white.)

Anyway, hope some of that helped.

Hmm yes very intresting. Is there anything that 1. c4 avoids that 1. Nf3 has to face?

There are always things you avoid or confront, if you make certain moves.  With 1.c4, you can avoid the d4 openings you don't want to face, but you may well find yourself in a symmetrical English (a whole branch of theory stemming from 1.c4 c5) or a King's English (1.c4 e5).

With 1.Nf3, you can get a favorable setup against the Dutch, and you avoid the Nimzo, but you eliminate certain advantageous options you would have had by playing Nc3 early while holding off on Nf3.

But again, in general, I don't think there are too many things that 1.Nf3 players dread seeing as a first or second move reply.  You just have to be ready for the possibility of a quieter game, should your opponent choose to go that way.  Because your first move certainly isn't a forcing one when you play that way.

I do, however, enjoy 1.Nf3 c5, 2. e5! steering a presumably quiet start into an open Sicilian.

It's all give and take.

With Nf3 you've put your N in front of your f2 pawn. Thus, should want to play a Botnivikk setup

Ah ok. So one good thing about 1. Nf3 is that it is quite good against 1. ... f5. Ok but generally it seems that 1. c4, 2. g3, 3. Nc3 avoids many annoying black responses from what I've understood. I don't mind playing the pure english variations at all I think. I need to try it out some more.

Is the english a good opening against people that are not booked and just play out their 5 starting moves like in the KID, QID or whatever they play against d4?

Anyone think the new Marin's GM repetoire trilogy will be good? I think the first book is out and covers 1. c4 e5. (the other two will cover 1. c4 c5 and rest of the responses)

I think the English is less studied than e4/d4 openings.It is fairly intuitive,soI'd say it is a good opening for those who don't want  to learn a lot of theory, right out of the gate. As far as Marin's books, I have the English Opening, vol. 1, and highly endorse it. Also, you will find a wealth of info in John Watson's Mastering the Chess Openings, vol 3, (Gambit Pub) which is on the English. Watson,IMO, is one of the best authors and theoreticians around. In addition, I'd rec. Starting Out: The English  by Neil McDonald (Everyman Chess) to get you up and running.I like the Everyman starting out series and the one on the English is ,IMO,a cut above most in the series.

I tried the english, but for me it's just not an aggressive enough way to fight for an advantage. Inevitably black will be somewhat comfortable given more space, he just shouldn't overdo it being black. I used to think that black was better in the english a long time ago! That is not the case, but if you're ok with equalizing with modest counterplay, there is nothing to worry about (except that if you're not good positionally it may be hard to handle on either side, especially black).

I like getting a small positional advantage out of the opening. Oftentimes when this happens you're the only one with an active plan that must be reacted to.

"and you get better at building up your position slowly rather than going for Bxf7..."

That is what I get with 1 d4. What I like about d4 is that he almost always has more space or is at least not down in space (or if he is black has pawn weaknesses to compensate), and he can slowly build up a strong position. Black often doesn't have many favorable tactics unless he makes concessions (like playing the inferior albin countergambit for example). With the english black is given more freedom to do what he wants.

I'm not saying it's a bad choice for any amateur though, this is just my preference.

I played the English OTB for many years as a club player and it has served me well. It's much more flexible than 1. Nf3. I found that most amateur's do not play well against it since its much more positional. That's on the plus side. The minus side is that its much more positional so you really need to know how to play it. But at least your are not blown off the board it the first dozen moves.

Nobody prepares for it. It forces White's will onto Black. It is an opening that the first few moves, Black cannot stop without going down in position or material. The strategy can work against nearly every Black defense.

AtahanT wrote:

Why do you play the english opening (1. c4) instead of 1. d4 or 1. Nf3?

______________________________________________________________________________

1.c4 is the best secret anti-Sicilian weapon.

i  learned to play chess 4 months ago and as white i only played the ruy lopez. however, i'm starting to play the english a bit and i love it. i find it easier to develop long term plans without worrying about sharp tactical shots. i've outplayed a few higher rated opponets with opening.

It's a weird pawn structure because you can't really throw pawns at it. I think a catalan setup is better than the double fianchetto that a lot of people use. It's not like anything is going to happen if you don't play d4 anyway.

1.Nf3 eliminates  1...e5  but allows the slav and does not control the d5 square. 1.Nf3 d5!  With 1.Nf3 you can not play the sämisch KID. With 1.Nf3 c5 white has a nice move in 2.e4! The open sicilian.

1.c4 controls the d5 square immediately. Give you a chance to avoid the slav if you want (You can chose the panov Botvinnik or pseudo-panno if you prefer).1.c4 e5! 1.c4 c5 is also good/OK.

Its hard to say what is best 1.c4 or 1.Nf3. It is as usual...it depends on your taste. 

I've been looking at the 3 volume set on the english by Marin and am wondering that myself. I really love the D4 openings and to try and switch to C4 is difficult. These books are getting older but I try. To me the concepts are so much different for white in comparison to D4.

I almost never do.