How many openings do you regularly play against 1.e4?

[Kevin Pacey]

This is a poll to see how many openings (defences/variations) respondents use against 1.e4 on a regular basis.


To try to clarify what an opening is to be considered for Black against 1.e4, every first move except 1...e5 or 1..c5 constitutes a Black opening against 1.e4.

In the case of 1...c5, every named Black Open Sicilian variation (or deviation at move three from 3...cxd4), or second move deviation (from 2...d6/Nc6/e6) against 2.Nf3, would be considered a Black opening against 1.e4.

In the case of 1...e5, every named Black 3...a6 4.Ba4 Ruy Lopez variation, or third move deviation (from 3...a6), would be considered a Black opening against 1.e4, and every second move deviation (from 2...Nc6) against 2.Nf3 would be considered a Black opening against 1.e4.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: How many openings do you regularly play against 1.e4?

I've left it to respondents to decide on their own whether they 'regularly' use a given Black opening vs. 1.e4.

In my case, I've used many of what I currently consider my regular choices (eight of them) against 1.e4 easily at least ten times in tournament games I've played in.

Also in my case, I've often tried to use a certain Open Sicilain variation (that I've taken up later in my career than another one I regularly use), but I've often been compelled to play against an Anti-Sicilian of some sort instead. So I'd still consider it a regular choice, even though I haven't played it at least ten times yet. Something similar has occured with a couple of Ruy Lopez variations I'd like to have played more by now as Black.

[John Upper]

Re: How many openings do you regularly play against 1.e4?

"The best way to learn an opening is still from a good book" -GM Joe Gallagher (2002)

That might have been true ten years ago, but I wonder if he still thinks that today. :)

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: How many openings do you regularly play against 1.e4?

That might have been true ten years ago, but I wonder if he still thinks that today. :)

I may not be as up to speed always as I should be, but what alternative methods to learning openings from books have improved much, as far as databases, the internet, etc. go, since 2002?

[John Upper]

Re: How many openings do you regularly play against 1.e4?

what alternative methods to learning openings from books have improved much, as far as databases, the internet, etc. go, since 2002?

databases have improved a lot in 10 years:
- the analysis produced by TableBases and the recent generation of computer engines makes the variations found in databases much more reliable than they used to be, and better than almost any book older than 10 years (Fischer's M60MG is one of the rare 40 year old books that is holding up very well);
- database software is better than ever at generating helpful overviews of openings (with stats and clickable game precedents) that you can save and sort and even print out in ECO-style tables;
- when you have a question about a line that's not discussed in a book or a database annotator you can just turn on the computer engine and play some games against it from that position;
- they are much bigger which makes their coverage far more thourough than they used to be (and much more than any book could ever be);
I know that last one invites the response that a lot of the games fattening up today's databases are such low quality that they make it worse. I used to think so too, but it's not so. (for the reason, read James Surowiecki's The Wisdom of Crowds)

the internet
- ten years ago it was rare to hear GMs discuss their games; today every major tournament has video commentary with post-mortems from the players;
- gives us more opportunities to practice our openings at any time of the day (FICS, ICC, PlayChess);
- by making information more accessible has encouraged people to make and share it (e.g. Hugh Brodie's CanBase, our Club site, maybe even this discussion board);
- is of course much faster at delivering information (though that's not so important for non-pros like me);


Having said all that, unlike the GMs I've asked, I still do read chess books. And opening books too: Moskalenko's "The Flexible French" and Shipov's "The Complete Hedgehog" are both terrific books from the last five years.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: How many openings do you regularly play against 1.e4?

I think Gallagher's claim (in 2002) that the best way to learn an opening is still from a good book was probably meant for non-GMs. At least some opening book methodology has also improved in the last ten years.

The opening xxx Explained series, for example, has almost excessive verbal explanation, in an entire book (rather than say internet post game GM commentary), about the ideas behind a particular opening by a titled player.

For the non-GM at least, databases and the internet might not yet completely substitute in a satisfactory way for such extensive verbal explanation in book form, IMHO. Barring downloading a book in file form from the internet. :)

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: How many openings do you regularly play against 1.e4?

I'm a bit shocked by how high the proportion of respondents there are that use just one opening regularly against 1.e4. A lot of modern advice about openings emphasizes the need for a wide repertoire in the age of databases, since so many more of one's opponent can more easily prepare against a narrow repertoire, if that's what one has. Even in a Canadian club, where everyone knows everyone, a narrow repertoire player might suffer. Perhaps the Canadian chess scene is fundamentally different than the international one.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: How many openings do you regularly play against 1.e4?

In my case, I mainly play against many of the same opponents year after year, in that I seldom venture far from Ottawa.

Decades ago, given the above, I used a partly statistical approach to see if I should be happy in theory with the number of regular defences I used (or would use) against 1.e4, 1.d4, 1.c4 and 1.Nf3 (other moves being quite uncommon to face for me).

The last two of these moves are somewhat uncommon for me to face, but I wanted to have at least three defences against any first move by White regardless (this squared with repertoire advice I had read). Hence I decided to employ at least some universal defences against 1.d4 that also can be applied in similar fashion to 1.c4 and 1.Nf3, and perhaps even transpose to my 1.d4 defence in question if White is compliant.

I decided I wanted to use some (at least three) 1.e4 or 1.d4 defences regularly, preferably to be used on average at least x times in y years. Having x=2 and y=1 suited me, even given the average number of times I faced 1.e4 and 1.d4 each year, and also given the average number of games I played per year. This squared with Larsen once writing something to the effect that GMs in his time might use even an offbeat opening maybe 2 or 3 times a year.

As a result of these musings, I realized I could comfortably have eight regular 1.e4 defences and four 1.d4 defences, and still hope to play each of them at least twice a year on average. Against 1.c4 I could use 1...e5, plus two universal 1.d4 setups, for a total of three 1.c4 defences. I did something similar vs. 1.Nf3 (my solution for my White repertoire was naturally different, but arrived at by similar methods). In my case, I actually didn't have to add a lot of defences to comply with the number of regular 1.e4 and 1.d4 defences I realized that I wanted.

Once I had this settled, my policy was to use a given regular defence if it suited a given situation/opponent, but to otherwise try to make my quotas for each regular defence by the end of each year if I could, if only to avoid getting rusty with any of them.

In recent years, I've had to face 1.d4 more often, so I've gone to five regular 1.d4 defences, and thinking of adding even more. I've also faced irregular stuff like the London System or the Trompovsky much more often, but my opponents generally paid the price of allowing me easy equality.

Having eight regular 1.e4 defences and hoping to use each of them at least twice a year is still quite possible for me, as the number of games I play per year on average is still about the same.

[Lucas Davies]

Re: How many openings do you regularly play against 1.e4?

I play the Caro-Kann and need nothing else.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: How many openings do you regularly play against 1.e4?

Perhaps you're equally open about declaring what you use against 1.d4 ? :)

My guess would be the Slav and/or Semi-Slav, to be perhaps consistent.

[Lucas Davies]

Re: How many openings do you regularly play against 1.e4?

Perhaps you're equally open about declaring what you use against 1.d4 ? :)

My guess would be the Slav and/or Semi-Slav, to be perhaps consistent.

I play the King's Indian. Sometimes I win with it. Sometimes not... -_-;

[Bindi Cheng]

Re: How many openings do you regularly play against 1.e4?

I think you only need 1 for each to start off and then 2 for diversification benefits and 3 maximum. Anything greater than 3 is a waste of time. I employ that philosophy and try to teach it to whoever wants to learn from me.

[Ed Seedhouse]

Re: How many openings do you regularly play against 1.e4?

I play the Caro-Kann and need nothing else.

But you darn near lost to me with it last year in the GPO. I'll admit the opening had little to do with it, however.

[Ed Seedhouse]

Re: How many openings do you regularly play against 1.e4?

I generally either play e5, or the rat or Pirc if I want to confuse a much lower rated opponent. Not that anyone should emulate me, even when I was at my best twenty years ago my openings were crap.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: How many openings do you regularly play against 1.e4?

Two more votes came in! I'm bumping this poll up again. :)