What are your thoughts on playing extremely defensive chess? - Chess Forums

Viznik

Dec 20, 2023

0

#1

What are your thoughts on an extremely defensive chess style? One where you make almost no aggressive moves, rather simply tighten your defense as much as possible, simply waiting for your opponent to make an “over-aggressive” mistake?

If you want to see a game I played and analyzed, as well as wrote more in detail on my club page, you can read it here: https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/castle-doctrine-playing-hyper-defensive

But, is a “castle doctrine” style of chess good for a mid level player? Or, do you think it runs in to problems?

What style of chess do you prefer?

Viznik

Dec 20, 2023

0

#2

TheNameofNames wrote:

its like blocking the entire time in a boxing match youll probably let a few punches through and start to fall apart, the best defense is a good offense because you need to control space if you dont win space or material the computer will say you're losing every time, its a blunder to defend the entire time you will lose especially against an engine. In the opening youre fighting for space and playing developing moves is perfectly fine but then its down to either winning material or gaining space not defending for no reason, you cant defend the entire time its literally impossible

This is an interesting perspective. I like it!

Viznik

Dec 20, 2023

0

#3

llama_l wrote:

Viznik wrote:

If you want to see a game I played and analyzed, as well as wrote more in detail on my club page, you can read it here: https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/castle-doctrine-playing-hyper-defensive

I looked at the game, and sure, it's fine. Putting nothing past your 3rd rank for a long time isn't technically correct, but you developed quickly, castled and connected your rooks, then you pushed pawns. This is a fine way of playing.

Just don't confuse "defensive" for "passive." Passive chess is always bad, but being defensive with well developed and coordinated pieces plus a sound pawn structure is fine.

Thanks llama — you’re definitely right me thinks. It’s one thing being defensive, another being passive. I guess, being defensive =/= missing attacking opportunities. Rather, defensive =/= strong structure waiting for pppurtonity to strike

spacecatchess2007

Dec 20, 2023

0

#4

It is not good, since the opposing side will always break through your position, either with pawns, pieces, trading pieces to an endgame, an attack, or checkmate.

marqumax

Dec 20, 2023

0

#5

I think it’s one of the best ways of playing actually. Looking at most top GM’s they often play like this. They make small improving moves but don’t take much risk, eating for their opponents to create weaknesses. By doing nothing I don’t mean literally nothing, but rather lack of any obvious attempt to drastically change the nature of the position

CaroKannEnjoyer02

Dec 20, 2023

0

#6

I think it is fine, but you cant be passive. Slightly improving your position every turn is good chess, even if you aren't making threats every turn.

Viznik

Dec 21, 2023

0

#7

marqumax wrote:

I think it’s one of the best ways of playing actually. Looking at most top GM’s they often play like this. They make small improving moves but don’t take much risk, eating for their opponents to create weaknesses. By doing nothing I don’t mean literally nothing, but rather lack of any obvious attempt to drastically change the nature of the position

Good point

magipi

Dec 21, 2023

0

#8

Did any of you actually check the game that was linked? None of the things the OP wrote about happened in that game. White didn't play defensive at all, instead he played quite aggressive. Opposite side castling followed by a pawnstorm.

magipi

Dec 21, 2023

0

#9

llama_l wrote:

Yes, as I said I looked at the game. Opening only on your 3rd rank can potentially cause problems, but in that game development was fast, king was safe, and then pawns were pushed. It's a reasonable way to play.

My problem is that the OP describes a sort of playstyle (extremely defensive), then presents a game that's the total opposite of that.

tygxc

Dec 21, 2023

0

#10

@1

"What are your thoughts on an extremely defensive chess style?" ++ It is probably the right way. In some positions you can and should attack, but in all positions you can and should defend.

"simply waiting for your opponent to make an “over-aggressive” mistake?"
++ Many great players like Steinitz, Capablanca, and Korchnoi liked being attacked.
Every aggressive move leaves a weakness.

"is a “castle doctrine” style of chess good for a mid level player?" ++ It is viable up to world champion level e.g. Petrosian. Now Karjakin and Giri are known for defensive play.

"do you think it runs in to problems?"
++ No. It is never wrong to defend, it is sometimes wrong to attack.

"What style of chess do you prefer?" ++ 'Style? I have no style' - Karpov

alwayshoping

Dec 21, 2023

0

#11

If it's within the rules then any tactic is fair if not necessarily much fun.

lagoon49

Mar 8, 2025

0

#12

i think defensive chess is one of the coolest ways to play , i guess you may like some typical military style defense games like castle defense they just let you defend your fort and let your opponent try their best only to steal their weaknesses left behind. in chess it can work but needs a lot of work thats why most players under 2000 dont play defence at all it needs a high degree of skill and its very rarely learnt but the best defenders are always the very good attackers and counter attackers too, i used to win a lot of tournaments by just playing nothing moves to improve my position but didnt bother attacking anything , i let my opponent burn their brains and clock time on that stuff. they will either blunder leave weaknesses for a counter attack or crack under time pressure.

Abtectous

Mar 8, 2025

0

#13

You dont understand chess bro

MariasWhiteKnight

Mar 8, 2025

0

#14

TheNameofNames wrote:

youll lose almost everytime

Exactly.

The second posting in this thread has already the answer.

The best move is often an attacking move.

And the higher your rating gets, the more important it is to find the best moves.

Even the best defensive chess players, like Carlsen and Nakamura, will play attacking moves whenever they can.

NM darkunorthodox88

Mar 8, 2025

0

#15

it depends on what you mean. there have been world class players like petrosian and karpov that no one would call aggressive but you bet if an opportunity for advantage springs up, they WILL take the initiative.

If you mean turtling up and taking no opportunities when presented then its a terrible idea.