This article takes a look at some principles upon which to predicate your choice of openings.
The most oft-repeated advice (even by Dvoretsky) is to select openings which suit your temperament and playing style. Thus, a young aggressive player should adopt the Sicilian Dragon, while a more mild-mannered fellow should defend the Ruy Lopez (for example).
I think this advice is a bit flawed for many reasons. Many players do not benefit from psychoanalyzing themselves in an attempt to find the openings which blend with their personality. First of all, such an analysis of one’s own character is often distorted. But more importantly, chess is a very dynamic game and in just about every opening there is a blend of strategic and tactical positions. In fact, in just about every position there is quite a blend of these things. You can attempt to steer the game in certain directions but often aiming for one extreme just leads to the next.
For example, many very sharp opening lines – if handled well by both sides – peter out quickly into balanced strategic situations. On the contrary, almost all strategic situations will inevitably “explode” into sharp tactical contests. Chess truly demands that you are able to do many things well. World champions can afford refined analyses of their strengths and try to steer the struggle there, but for most players this attempt is often fruitless.
The simplest way to select openings is to work from those systems which you’ve already developed a history of playing. Don’t get caught up in trying to find a perfect harmony between the opening and your tastes. If you’ve been playing the French all your life, sticking with it is often a very fruitful path if you are willing to investigate alternative ways of handling it from time to time (for example).
The second principle in selecting openings is somewhat different. In my experience of teaching, I always tried to steer a truly searching student towards progressively playing lines which are more and more respected at the top level. For example, a King’s Gambit addict may eventually want to expand towards the Ruy Lopez for White. Theoretically speaking there really is very little wrong with playing the King’s Gambit, though most strong players feel that it doesn’t offer White very much. The real problem is that such lines tend to be a bit too one-dimensional for the development of chess strength. When playing a King’s Gambit, the strategies and tactics are quite limited for White – rapid development, kingside attack (this is a bit crude of an assessment, but my point remains the same). The Ruy Lopez demands more strategic and tactical diversity on the part of both sides, and will assist you on your chess journey as far as you want to go – even if that’s World Champion.
This tends to be the case with almost all openings which are played at the highest levels on a frequent basis. Because they are so principled and reliable, many ideas, paths, systems have been developed and there is a ton to learn from such systems.
This an important point to keep in mind when selecting your openings. While selecting such systems may require more work, in the long run you develop better chess strength, and a more reliable set of openings.
In the next article, I will suggest some sample repertoires.
Subscribe