I agree with Markovich about the importance of playing 1...e5.  However, I've lost some of my dogmatism on that score some time ago.  If your main goal is to become the very best chess player possible, then follow Markovich's advice.

If your main goal is to have fun (which includes winning), then pick an opening that has similar virtues to 1...e5, but not necesssarily 1...e5.  Some of the virtues of 1...e5 include the requirement to learn tactics. It also requires a player to make long term plans and not be afraid of his opponent's preparation.  Those three requirements should be the cornerstone of any player's repertoire regardless of their choice of openings.

Most teachers (including myself) don't recommend the Sicilian to someone starting out.  However, I have had several students who have advanced precisely by changing to Sicilian variations after a few years of service to 1...e5.  An interesting choice in that regard is to play the Sicilian with an early ...e5.  One line that has proven particularly successful in the junior circuits is:  1.e5 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cd4 4.Nd4 e5.  Another is 2....d6 3.d4 cd 4.Nd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.f3 e5.

These openings are played with the verve and tactical awareness that makes 1...e5 such a good opening.

I believe that players should avoid openings that don't make them think.  A classic example of this is learning the Accelerated Dragon by rote, winning numerous games due to a few traps and then losing to players who know how to plan and know the tactics.  I know that I am disagreeing with some of the best-selling chess authors by saying as much, but best-selling and best advice aren't always the same thing.

Again, I agree with Markovich in his preference for 1...e5, but don't be dogmatic about it!  (I would even go so far as to recommend against the Russian Defense and stick with 2...Nc6 main lines!)

Ostapbender,

I agree that the Bd3 closed Tarrasch is a tough line, and it's really up to the individual player as to whether he's comfortable playing the black side of it.  However, if he finds that he's not, there are interesting alternatives.  The Be7 lines can be very complex (and white is less likely to be prepared for them), and 3...c5, 4.exd Qxd5 is very respectable, avoids and IQP and gives black an very solid position.   

I agree with you that 1...e5 is a fantastic, well respected, theoretically sound defense.  I have experimented with it myself, and I find that I like the main line positions of the Ruy and the Italian.  However, just on move 2 as Black, you have to be prepared for the King's Gambit, the Vienna, the Bishop's Opening, the Center game, 2.Qh5(don't laugh - it can be tough when played by a strong player), 2.c3, and probably a few other "dubious" lines.  On move two of the French you really have little to worry about.   

In fact, comparing the French to 1...e5, you see the added work that 1...e5 takes:

French:   
1.Exchange (harmless), 
2. Advance (straightforward with good chances for Black)
3.  KIA (can be met with relatively little preparation and standard French moves)
4. Nc3 (Black has a wide choice but can stay in French-type lines)
5.  Nd2 (again, Black has many interesting choices, but theory is necessary)

...e5
1. Spanish (a massive theoretical complex, although interesting and worth learning)
2.  King's Gambit (sharp, likely to get in trouble without knowing the theory)
3.  Scotch (sharp, tactical, again must know some theory to survive opening)
4.  Italian (theoretical with some sharp options like Evans Gambit)
5.  Scotch Four Knights 
6.  Spanish Four Knights
7.  KIA 
8.  Ponziani
9.  Center Game
10.  Vienna
11.  Bishop's Opening
12. Ponziani
13.  2.Qh5, 2.c3, etc.

With many of the 'lesser' lines against 1..e5, you are still going to get in trouble if you are not prepared.   

In my experience, I find that my results with the French are consistent - I generally beat lower ranked players and have good chances against equal/higher rated players.  With 1...e5, my results are all over the place.  I'll beat someone ranked 300 points higher than me in a main line Spanish and then lose vs. someone rated 300 points lower in the Ponziani or the King's Gambit.   

In many ways the French is an ideal opening - it can be played at a very high theoretical level or used to avoid theory.  It blends well with one's d4 repertoire. It gives similar pawn structures most of the time.  There are thousands of GM games to learn from.  Watson's French book is one of the finest opening books ever written, and it accessible to lower rated players, too.  Finally, there is enough diversity within the opening to allow you to modify your repertoire as theory and your chess skills evolve.

Ultimately, play what you enjoy and feel comfortable with.

Scott

Dinomike100 wrote on 06/30/06 at 18:48:19:


Don't try this one as Black. You will have a tough time after 6.Bc4!
I'd rather advise you, to search your second defence in the French itself. I think this will cost you less time than studying a whole new opening and you wrote you were kind of lazy. After both 3.Nc3 and 3.Nd2 Black has a choice.
In the French section there is a thread on 3.Nd2 Be7 (a6, c5, Nc6, Nf6 are other normal moves), which sometimes leads to Rubinstein-like positions, if Black plays later ...dxe4. After 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Black again can play dxe4, so the Steinitz remains.
Well, 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e5 Nd7 5.f4 c5 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Be3 (there are some White deviations) Black again can chose: a6, Qb6, cxd4, Be7. There must be something to your liking.

Smyslov-Fan, Good to see we're in agreement!

Dinomike - 

I think that your lines against Nc3 and Nd2 are solid, but I'm not sure that the Caro will offer you too much more.  If you like the exchange, the KIA and the advance French, I would say stick with it!  Against both Nc3 and Nd2, you can play Nf6 with a similar pawn structure (if white plays 3...Nf6 4.Bg5, you can go with 4...Be7).  You can find a good explanation of the Nf6 Tarrasch in Watson's "Play the French II" and a good explanation of the French Classical in his "Play the French III" (although he recommends the Burn).   

You can also avoid the IQP lines in the Tarrasch with Qxd5 (also covered in Watson's third edition).   

And if you could even meet 1.d4 with 1.e6 (inviting the French and avoiding the Tropowsky and Pseudo Tromp) and after 2.c4 go for the QGD or Dutch Stonewall (both solid) or the Nimzo/QID (solid, dynamic and theoretical), or the semi-slav (wild complications).  All in all, I would draw on you experience in the French and build on it.  After all, you are just as likely to find lines in the Caro that you don't like and go searching elsewhere.

Best,
Scott

Smrex, you beat me by a minute!   

Dinomike,

May I ask what you didn't like about the French?  Or are you just looking for variety?  I think the Caro is probably the easiest transition from the French, but the pawn structures in the three main variations of the Caro can be diverse.  In the French, you can generally get very similar pawn structures depending on the variations you choose, and for many players this is a big advantage.  Also, at least in my limited number of games with the French and Caro, the Caro seems more defensive with less immediate opportunity for counterplay.  Furthermore, my experience with the French has been that natural moves from white don't work out well in many positions, whereas natural moves against the Caro seemed to be reasonably strong.   

In any event, I think the French and Caro are good choices to avoid theory.  Of course, there is plenty of theory in both these openings as many GMs depend on them as the heart of their repertoire, and they are the only theoretically acceptable alternatives to 1...e5 and 1...c5.  However, there are far fewer ways for white to deviate from main lines in the French and Caro when compared to the Sicilian and 1...e5.  Even if these deviations are not theoretically dangerous, you still have to learn them well.

Just my two cents,
Scott

It's nice to see the Caro-Kann coming to life on this forum, and I would agree with Willempie that it's a good place to start.   

In addition to the sharp 4 Nc3 and Short System, Black can also play the immediate 3 ... c5, which isn't nearly as bad as it looks, and presumably limits the amount of preparation required to be ready for the Advance.

After 3 f3, Black can transpose into Classical French lines with 3 ... e6, which was discussed somewhere recently on another thread.

The KIA does yield different positions, but in general Black's development is fairly straightforward and rather plan-oriented, which was a key interest in the original post.

And, as Willempie mentioned, one of the advantages of learning the Caro-Kann is that you have Karpov's games to draw on.  Not a bad role model if you're looking for ultra-solid...