How many openings do you use regularly against 1.d4?

[Kevin Pacey]

This is a poll to see how many openings (defences/variations) respondents use against 1.d4 on a regular basis.

To try to briefly clarify what a Black opening is against 1.d4 seems difficult, so I'll leave classification to respondents' judgement. Perhaps most 1.d4 Black openings would be officially called 'Defences', but there are exceptions (the Snake Benoni I would consider as seperate from the Modern Benoni, and the Fajarowicz Variation [3...Ne4] I would consider as seperate from the Budapest Defence, for example). Also, in many cases the mainline second move for White that one might expect to face is 2.c4 (or else c2-c4 early on anyway), before the opening can even be identified.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: How many openings do you use regularly against 1.d4?

In my case I use significantly fewer openings (five) on a regular basis against 1.d4 than I do against 1.e4 (eight).

I have played the Slav vs. 1.d4 well over ten times, especially via 1...d5. It can also be reached via 1...Nf6 or 1...c6 (besides via a number of other White first moves). However I don't consider the Slav a regular choice for me anymore, as for many years I gave up playing it. Then again, 1.d4 c6 is starting to creep into my games as Black more often these days, sometimes producing a Caro-Kann.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: How many openings do you use regularly against 1.d4?

Some 1.d4 Black opening choices can involve mixing and matching. If one plays the Nimzo-Indian (vs. 3.Nc3) there can be various choices of what to do vs. 3.Nf3. I would only count the Nimzo-Indian plus, say, the Queen's Indian or some QGD variation, as just one complete opening that I'd use. Add to that say the Black side of a Closed Catalan (or g3-[Anti]Benoni) vs. 3.g3, and I'd still count that as only one opening altogether (for purposes of this poll). Even though technically this involves more than one defence, they wouldn't be altogether independent of each other.

[Lucas Davies]

Re: How many openings do you use regularly against 1.d4?

One Opening Against Everything.

[Jonathan Berry]

Re: How many openings do you use regularly against 1.d4?

Guessing that Lucas has read Lord of the Rings.

And knowing that contributing to this thread makes me possible fodder for another book Why chess forum posters never become grandmasters.

Unless you answered with a Small Number (TM), you are not a fan of Botvinnik, who, in the spirit of Less Is More or Small Is Beautiful (wouldn't those be great book titles, too?) recommended that to each of the main opening moves a player should have one main defence and one reserve--but know them in excruciating (to me) detail.

Finally, one opening name (such as Benoni or Dutch) can cover a lot of territory. If you may play a Leningrad or a Stonewall, that counts as two. Or if you play the Rat, which works equally against 1.e4 as against 1.d4 or 1.c4, does that count as one-half of an opening? Indeed, there are some who think that a Rat is not a whole(some) opening, outside of the considerations of this thread.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: How many openings do you use regularly against 1.d4?

I did mention earlier in this thread, as an example, that the Snake Benoni would count as a seperate opening in my eyes from the Modern Benoni. So, yes, a Leningrad Dutch would be seperate from a Stonewall Dutch. I'd draw the line at counting the Neo-Grunfeld as a seperate opening from the Grunfeld, but I have a master friend who actually would. To each his own.

I'd count the Rat as one opening against 1.e4. Also as one opening against 1.d4, since usually White's formation is significantly different from a 1.e4 Rat, in my eyes, with c2-c4 often included (that's how to tell a KID from a Pirc, as it happens). Even if it transposed to a 1.e4 Rat position, it still would count as belonging to one's repertoire against 1.d4 as well.

For the sake of opening independence, I myself have at least one seperate defence against (or to avoid) the Trompovsky per independent complex of defences I have (i.e. one 'opening' altogether), as otherwise the KID and [Neo-]Grunfeld, each played only via 1...Nf6, for example, wouldn't be independent if I had just one line against the Tromp. I'd need at least two lines, for peace of mind concerning the integrety of my repertoire against 1.d4, if I wanted the KID and [Neo-]Grunfeld to always be independent after 1.d4.

Concerning the possible title of a book, I came up with one out of the blue this evening after a flop of an idea occured to me. The book of bad ideas might be a humourous genre title (though most probably such a book has already been written). It occured to me after I thought of the idea of edible (unwrapped) poker chips. Awful. :D

[Lucas Davies]

Re: How many openings do you use regularly against 1.d4?

My post used to be in all caps, but then it was bizarrely edited so that the first letter in every word is capitalised. I have no idea why this happened.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: How many openings do you use regularly against 1.d4?

Lucas, as far as I know typing words in all capital letters is considered 'shouting' by internet/email convention, i.e. you might be assumed to be flamming someone. Hence chesstalk's editing [process?] may not allow that. My theory anyway.

[Lucas Davies]

Re: How many openings do you use regularly against 1.d4?

Lucas, as far as I know typing words in all capital letters is considered 'shouting' by internet/email convention, i.e. you might be assumed to be flamming someone. Hence chesstalk's editing [process?] may not allow that. My theory anyway.

Sometimes you just need to shout out to the world... :-/

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: How many openings do you use regularly against 1.d4?

Thought I'd bump up this poll closer to the top of page 1, since people are still voting in my 1.e4 defences poll thread.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: How many openings do you use regularly against 1.d4?

Thought I'd bump up this poll closer to the top of page 1 again, since people are still voting in my similar poll threads on 1.e4 defences (or vs. 1.e4 & 1.d4).

[Gary Ruben]

Re: How many openings do you use regularly against 1.d4?

How many openings fall into the category "irregular"?

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: How many openings do you use regularly against 1.d4?

How many openings fall into the category "irregular"?

For purposes of this poll, any defence/variation (or single independent combination of defences/variations) that is used against 1.d4 on a regular basis by a respondent (in his opinion) would count as a single opening against 1.d4.

For example, I play the [Neo-]Grunfeld against 1.d4, and I also have a matching (independent) variation to use against each of the London System setup and the Trompovsky. These last two might be counted as irregular 1.d4 openings, in many older or old-fashioned opening books at least (MCO would, I think). There are countless irregular openings/defences/variations that don't even make most (if any) books.

While I haven't consciously come up with two (in fact, any) independent choices to match each of the [Neo-]Grunfeld and Nimzo-Indian up with 1.d4 Nf6 2.c3, that irregular opening would be too rare to worry about, unless at least one opponent I face often started using it against me. That particular sequence might transpose to another irregular 1.d4 opening I do have something against, anyway.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: How many openings do you use regularly against 1.d4?

I have played the Slav vs. 1.d4 well over ten times, especially via 1...d5. It can also be reached via 1...Nf6 or 1...c6 (besides via a number of other White first moves). However I don't consider the Slav a regular choice for me anymore, as for many years I gave up playing it. Then again, 1.d4 c6 is starting to creep into my games as Black more often these days, sometimes producing a Caro-Kann.

As far as I can tell, there are at least two (deep?! :) ) points to 1.d4 c6 (rather than just 1...d5/Nf6, in order to reach the Slav or Semi-Slav):

One is to try to discourage the Trompovsky[-like] play that results from 1...d5/Nf6 2.Bg5.

Critical may be the stubborn 1.d4 c6 2.Bg5, when after the virtually untested 2...Qb6 the question is whether White can easily afford to give away one or possibly even two pawns. I don't like 2...Qa5+ so much (which has also hardly been tested) in case of the queenless middlegame that should follow after 3.Qd2, where Black is behind in development early.

In case of 1.d4 c6 2.Nf3 Nf6 (better than 2...d5 3.Bg5, for frustrating Tromp lovers anyway) 3.Bg5, just 3...Ne4 (intending 4...Qb6 if the bishop retreats one square either way) is awkward.

The other main point to 1.d4 c6 that I can see is if one wishes to play a Caro-Kann or a Semi-Slav, without having to possibly play the Black side of a Tromp, French or Slav Exchange by transposition. This happens after 1.d4 c6 2.c4 e6 (a position that also can be arrived at by switching Black's first two moves, if Black wishes for different transpositional possibilities).

This position has recently been reached in the games of many GMs, as I found out in my databases when I was wondering about 2...e6 within this precise move order. Now if 3.e4 d5 we reach a line of the Caro-Kann where Black has been doing alright, e.g. after the critical 4.e5 (reaching an Advance Caro) when 4...c5 may easily be best, with a known line of the Advance.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: How many openings do you use regularly against 1.d4?

The other main point to 1.d4 c6 that I can see is if one wishes to play a Caro-Kann or a Semi-Slav, without having to possibly play the Black side of a Tromp, French or Slav Exchange by transposition. This happens after 1.d4 c6 2.c4 e6 (a position that also can be arrived at by switching Black's first two moves, if Black wishes for different transpositional possibilities).

One might ask, what point(s) are there to the 1.d4 e6 2.c4 c6 move order, avoiding the Tromp, most standard Caro-Kann lines or the Slav Exchange, in the hope of a French or Semi-Slav possibly happening, as opposed to just playing 1.d4 e6 2.c4 d5 ?

A possible point I've thought of is that one might prefer the 1.d4 e6 2.c4 c6 move order if one has a Dutch system(s) involving ...e6 and ...c6 in one's repertoire as Black, and one wishes to see what White plays at move three before steering for the Semi-Slav or else a Dutch (with either ...d6 or ...d5 included).

Chess can be a very convoluted game. :)