TopNotch,

You do make some excellent points. Isn't it interesting though how often we choose openings that seem to contradict our style.

Case in point: Yasser Seirawn, who rescused the Pirc from extinction with his novelty of the century in Sax-Sairawn, Brussels 1998. (Okay, perhaps this is a bit of a hyperbole   )  But I suppose the exception proves the rule.

The Pirc, KID, Dragon and Lenigrad type systems suit players who prefer to equalise by counter attack rather than equalise by defence.

Once your style has been forged its difficult to modify it. For example in my case I play the Kings Indian and love it and feel at home in it, however I understood that to be a complete player I would need to have a grasp of a different kinds of position so I studied the QGD and QGA with a mind to playing them occassionally. However when presented with the possiblity to play these systems I rarely did, and although I enjoyed reasonable success with them, they never kindled the passion within me like the KID and other counter attacking systems. Nonetheless the experienced gained in these double d pawn openings was not wasted and helped me navigate such things as the Blackmar Deimer and Veresov Openings successfully when they cropped up. 

Passion can be a double edged sword and often clouds sound judgement, for instance I know some players who feel compelled to attack at all costs whether White or Black and this sometimes influences ones Opening choices significantly. The problem here is that attacking is not always indicated and even in the sharpest Openings and Gambits the opponent has ways to quiet the play even if it means incurring a slight disadvantage, so it is wise to learn how to play 'quietly' as well as how to play 'loudly'

One last point I should mention, and it is something that one rarely sees emphasised clearly in the theory books, that is, familiarising oneself fully with what are the good and bad positions typically arising out of the chosen Opening and how best to play these positions in each case. For example, how does Black best go about solving his light squared Bishop dilemna in the French Defence, or is this Bishop really bad at all, and if it is not bad why is that so. These are the kinds of the issues that one new to any Opening system must resolve before one can feel truly comfortable with it.
 
Toppertz  

There is one good reason to prefer the Pirc iso the Dragon, when playing the Leningrad: 1.d4 d6 avoids all the 2nd move deviations.

J-dog wrote on 11/23/06 at 00:28:27:


Stormcrow makes a good point. Even if the Pirc was theoretically sound, it might just be easier to get a theortically sound position by other means. 

However after watching the Kasparov Najdorf DVDs and after watching him demonstrate Black surviving after playing a series of only moves in the Bg5 variation and saying casually that of course once this is commited to memory there is no problem, that the Najdorf wasn't for me. Now of course there are similar lines in the Pirc, but it seems far less than in just one sub-variation of the Sicilian, and of course I've memorised them for the Pirc now (well I hope).

Also there was a comment from Korchnoi, something like even if the problems with the KID might be solvable, why would you voluntarily set them for yourself as Black? I have a similar feeling about the Pirc, but like the other addicts, I just can't give it up. . 

I think as Black, if White is going for the critical lines, then your choice of defence comes down to which particular concession(s) you are willing to accept and solve (e.g. lack of space, material, bishop pair, pawn structure, development, bad piece placement, passivity etc) and what concessions White makes in return (usually you get a bad deal  )

   

[quote author=TopNotch link=1164073377/0#8 date=1164153817
I agree with the above post and would suggest to Antillian that rather than give up the Pirc, which is rather useful albeit difficult defence, simply add some other defence to your arsenal. 1...e5 was a good choice so continue to play em both.

As a junior I played the pirc a lot and not without success, but later I found I was getting better positions with the Sicilian and 1...e5. When I left the junior ranks I adopted 1...e5 less frequently as more and more of my opponents opted for the Ruy Lopez.

There are certain types of attacking players that have great difficulty playing against pirc setups and against these types the pirc can be particularly useful.

In conclusion: The pirc may not be quite good enough for regular use at elite level, but nevertheless it is a combative and resilient defence that should be respected.

Topertz [/quote]

I am leaning towards this option actually - playing both 1..d6 and 1...e5.  Let's hope she understands that I just cannot be faithful to her alone. 

Interesting point about some attacking players not being comfortable against the Pirc. That is food for thought. What type would that be? 

In my early days of my love affair with the Pirc, i lost some games to the Be3 systems with the charateristic g4 h4 pawn storms against the finachetto position. Having learnt how to defend these positions properly, I now enjoy playing those positions. 

Mnb, perhaps we will meet. 

parisestmagique wrote on 11/21/06 at 17:24:03:


I agree with the above post and would suggest to Antillian that rather than give up the Pirc, which is a rather useful albeit difficult defence, simply add some other defence to your arsenal. 1...e5 was a good choice so continue to play em both.

As a junior I played the pirc a lot and not without success, but later I found I was getting better positions with the Sicilian and 1...e5. When I left the junior ranks I adopted 1...e5 less frequently as more and more of my opponents opted for the Ruy Lopez.

There are certain types of attacking players that have great difficulty playing against pirc setups and against these types the pirc can be particularly effective.

In conclusion: The pirc may not be quite good enough for regular use at elite level, but nevertheless it is a combative and resilient defence that should be respected.

Topertz

parisestmagique wrote on 11/21/06 at 17:24:03:


Ah you play the Modern eh - You are not a true loyal defender! 

I agree that White can properly get away with more mistakes in the Pirc paticulary in some quieter systems. But White's mistakes allow Black to egualize more quickly and Black can often outplay White positionally when White does not know what he is doing. I actually don't worry about these quiet systems so much as the ultra sharp forcing ones. Lke JEH, I get good results against the classical.