Halfacreek -

I've gotta be honest, I was in the exact same position as you not that long ago.  Here's a simplified version of the tactical repertoire I used. My criteria for choosing openings was the following: 1. fairly open/tactical positions where the middlegame plan was simple. 2. Slightly offbeat openings that were playable but not the absolute mainline (so you don't have to learn too much). 3. Openings where I could find a good introductory text/video/whatever. Let me make this clear, until you get to 1800-2000 I recommend studying tactics primarily. This repertoire is only designed to allow you to practice those tactics in relatively even positions. Once your tactics improve to that level you'll want to improve on parts of this repertoire, although to be fair only the 2 knights vs the french is truly questionable and that's because it gives black such easy equality after 3 moves

1. e4 e5 

Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 vs the 2 knights play the max lange. vs Bc5 do NOT try to play the max lange, play the evans. After 4. 0-0 Nf6 5. d4 Bxd4! 6. Nxd4 Nxd4 white ends up a pawn down for pretty much no compensation.

1. e4 c5

Nf3 whatever d4 cxd4 Nxd4. Here's your goal position - pawn on f3, Be3 Qd2 Nc3 0-0-0. This is the yugoslav vs the dragon, english attack vs the najdorf, classical, schevenigen, etc. Your primary plan is unbelievably simple. Attack the kingside with g4, h4, etc. There is a ton of theory you could learn, but you don't actually have to vs lower rated opponents. I personally think this is the best part of the repertoire because as you become a better player you can simply add to your knowledge of theory and play one of the strongest systems vs the sicilian.

1. e4 e6   

Keeping it tactical is tougher than I like. You can actually play the 2 knights vs this with 2. Nf3 and 3. Nc3. There's some theory (much less than 2. d4 and 3. Nc3) you need to know here, but natural moves by black actually give white a nice edge.

1. e4 c6 

Fantasy variation with e4 c6 d4 d5 f3 leads to interesting and rather lively play.

1. e4 d6

Keep it simple, you can use basically the same setup as vs the sicilian with d4, f3, Be3, Nc3 Qd2 and Nge2 if necessary. Same strategy. Again, this tuff works well vs lower rated players.


Okay, now as black.

vs e4 

Here, either the Nf6 center counter or a sicilian. Either way you are gonna have to learn a little theory. The sicilian is my personal recommendation because the positions you learn their will really help you out. Accelerated dragon is a nice straight forward one to start with. Not as tactical as some, but a decent place to start.

vs d4

Please, please do NOT play the budapest. It seems like it might be awesome, but it's not really a gambit and white can EASILY force the position into a rather dull middle game. My recommendation here isn't going to agree with a lot of people. I'd recommend the chigorin. 1. d4 d5 2. c4 Nf6. It's easy to learn, can lead to nice tactical positions and it's not particularly well studied by most d4 players.

Resources I found useful:

Max lange, 2 knights french - A startling chess opening repertoire by Baker
Chigorin, f3 caro - foxy openings videos (Caro Krusher and something about the Chigorin)
Accelerated dragon - Openings for black explained by Alburt, Dzindzi, Perelshtyn

SL

Well, you might try 1.d4 d5 2.c4 in KG-style after all  .

I have a weak spot for the Marshall Gambit in the Scandinavian. Black is struggling in the quiet lines after 3.d4 Nxd5 4.Nf3 g6 5.c4 and 5.Be2. Better than it's reputation is the Kieler Gambit 3.d4 Nxd5 4.c4 Nb4, but 4.Nf3 Bf5 5.Bd3 Bxd3 6.Qxd3 e6 7.o-o and 8.c4 is much less attractive. So the Portuguese Variation 3...Bg4 is the logical choice, but be prepared for 3.Nf3 then.
Still why not 1...e5 ? You already mentioned the Two Knights. The Ruy Lopez give Black a wide choice; Markovich eg recommends 3...Bc5. He has paid attention to it in two columns of Hard Chess; I am too lazy now to look for the adresses. There also has been some debate on this site.

But I don't like the Budapest. It's not really a gambit and White usually has a long lasting space advantage. That's not my cup of tea. Moreover you must find remedies against 2.Nf3, 1.c4 and 1.Nf3 as well.
Markovich will recommend the Tarrasch Defence. This might suit you, if you don't mind playing with an isolated centre pawn. But to be honest, in the main line the common verdict is that Black's prospects are rather gloomy.
I used to recommend the Benkö Gambit. Since Dutch GM Van der Weide has published two nice articles on Jeremy Silman's site I have changed my mind. Black struggles for survival.
I also hesitate to recommend my beloved Dutch Iljin-Zjenevsky. White has several dangerous 2nd move options; Black can avoid these with 1.d4 e6 and 2...f5, but then you have to play the French as well.
So the Abrahams-Noteboom might be a good choice. To quote Van der Werf and Van der Vorm in their 1996 book: "It usually leads to an unbalanced position in which a short draw is very unlikely to occur. It is an opening for the adventurous player."
1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 c6
A) 4.Nf3 dxc4 5.e3 b5 6.a4 Bb4 7.Bd2 a5 8.axb5 Bxc3 9.Bxc3 cxb5 10.b3 Bb7 is the beginning of the real Abrahams-Noteboom.
B) 4.e4 is the quite dangerous Marshall Gambit, but Bb4 is not bad.
C) 4.cxd5 exd5 gives Black a good version of the QGD Exchange Variation.
D) 4.e3 and most Abrahams-Noteboom addicts play the Stonewall here. I advice against it. If you want to keep it simple, then 4...Nf6 (Meran Variation; Black has avoided the dangerous Botvinnik Variation as 5.Bg5 is not possible) 5.Nf3 Nbd7 and 6...Bd6. This is a kind of Colle-Koltanowski with colours reversed; Black prepares ...e5 but sometimes equalizes with ...c5. An example is 6.Bd3 Bd6 7.e4 (or 7.o-o o-o 8.e4 dxe4) dxe4 9.Nxe4 Nxe4 10.Bxe4 c5 11.Bc2 Qc7 12.Qd3 f5 13.b4 (13.Rd1 cxd4 14.Qxd4 Bc5 15.Qh4 Grünfeld-Bogoljubow, Berlin 1926, e5 16.a3 a5 17.b3 Nf6) b6 14.dxc5 bxc5 15.Rd1 Be7 16.b5 Bf6 Portisch-Larsen, Teeside 1972. Quite dangerous is 6.Qc2 Bd6 7.g4!? (Shabalov).
E) 3.Nf3 c6 4.Qc2 Nf6 5.g3 (5.Bg5 dxc4!? 6.Qxc4 b5!? or 5.e3 Nbd7 6.Nc3 Bd6 compare line D) dxc4 6.Qxc4 b5 and 7...Bb7.
F) 1.c4 e6 2.Nf3 (2.Nc3 d5 3.d4 c6 transposes) d5 3.b3 Nf6 4.g3 c5 5.Bg2 Nc6 6.o-o Be7 Black offers a Tarrasch or Semi Tarrasch, were b2-b3 is innocent.
G) 1.Nf3 d5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 c6 4.o-o Bf5 or g6.

At a later stage you might replace the Noteboom for the Botvinnik Variation and Slav Exchange 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nf3 (3.cxd5) Nf6 4.Nc3 (4.cxd5) e6 5.Bg5 without too much work.

TalJechin wrote on 12/01/06 at 13:31:35:

I agree 100% with this.
Quote:

I dont entirely agree here. In the Evans you very often have 2 other scenarios:
3) black returns the pawn, but not voluntarily and has a passive position
4) You build up pressure and take over the center. This goes on way deep in the middle game. Esp at 15-1600 level you are often allowed the d4-e4 center.

Plus of course you have the variety that black does not agree to play the Evans and plays the 2KD or even the Philidor.
Quote:

These are exactly the reasons why I think the KG is less well suited for players "starting out in tactics". The tactical themes usually are more advanced and complex.
Quote:

This I agree with just settle for either the KG or the Italian complex and start playing. There is no golden choice for improving tactics but both have enough to offer.

This makes it a bit clearer on what your exact goal is. If you want to support your tactical training by your openings I think the Italian complex (1.e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4) is your best bet. I played it throughout my youth and there are few players at my level who are better in tactical tricks (though like Kramnik I sometimes overlook a mate in one ).

The Evans is very good, but if you find it too much theory there is a good alternative in 4.c3 followed by d4. Here you can go for the Greco (4.c3 Nf6 5. d4 exd4 6.cxd4 Bb4+ 7.Nc3 with 7.Bd2 being a good but more solid option leading to open play but with less tactics) which although highly researched is one of the most rewarding lines with regards to tactics. It is not for nothing that this line has been studied since 1600. There are quieter alternatives as well in the Giuoco. This is the line that taught me how to attack and sacrifice.

Against the 2 knights defense the line Keano mentioned leads to tactical play and is rather decent (though black is very much ok). In this line much depends on taking the initiative and keeping it. It is in any case better for tactics than the Max Lange as there are quite some more ideas in the position. 4.Ng5 is good (if not best), but gives the initiative to black. So imo you should be more experienced with defense before playing it. 4.d3 followed by 5.c3 is a good line (Karpov and Short play this sometimes) but more strategic in nature. So I'd go for Keano's suggestion.

The king's gambit is a good option as well, but I think less suited for your aims. Not because the KG is less tactical (or bad ). Imo you have to be a bit more well versed in tactics before playing it.

PS when checking books on the Italian complex a rule of the thumb is that if they dont have references to correspondance games or Estrin they are bad.

The Vienna Gambit is 1 e4 e5 2 Nc3 Nc6 3 f4 and may or may not be very strong, but everyone plays 2…Nf6 against the Vienna anyway so it doesn’t matter. I’ve no idea what the Halloween Gambit is, which is a bit of a bad sign, really.

In my opinion the likelihood is that all these lines with the exception of the Max Lange will ultimately be shown to lose by force, but that’s neither here nor there of course. I’d go for either the King’s Gambit or the Evans (actually if you’re an ambitious player I’d go for 3 Bb5, but if you want to play gambits then fair enough). I’m no expert on how the Max Lange might most frequently arise, but I’m not sure about 3 Bc4 Bc5 4 00 Nf6 5 d4 as you give. 5…Bxd4 6 Nxd4 Nxd4 is possible, is it not? That might be quite an interesting gambit or it might not but it’s not the Max Lange, and that’s the trouble with the Max Lange, really; you can’t get it very often.

If you are interested in the ML, though, there was a long series on it in the splendid German magazine Kaissiber recently, and a taster in one of Stefan Bucker’s articles (not the most recent) at Chesscafe.com.

To determine your choice, I'd recommend playing through some 19th Century games.

If you want to limit your time and your opponent's options the Kings Gambit is the way to go, although I suspect out of the four lines the Evans is the strongest- Nigel Short just played another game with it in the Commonwealth Championship and won !

To repeat the advice of others, you could do worse than just do some tactical training exercises.

Andrew

You are turning my argument upside down.    I did not write, that White should base his repertoire on fear for the Philidor and Hungarian. I only wrote, that these do not lead to open, tactical positions. That's just a fact. So I don't see how you can disagree.   
In fact I assume, that Halfacreek will be very happy to meet these, with his experience in closed positions. But his chances to apply his newly developed tactical skills will not be very great.

Still I wonder why everybody automatically grabs the e-pawn (like me 25 years ago), when striving for tactical positions?

When chosing the Evans Gambit, start studying 4...Bb6 first. If White's best is 5.a4 a6 6.c3 Nf6 7.d3, the preferable move order is 4.c3 Nf6 5.b4 Bb6 6.a4 a6 7.d3. So important is 6.Nc3 Nf6 and Black's results are very good. 7.Nd5 (7.d4 Bxd4 8.Nxd4 Nxd4 9.f4 d6 is reminiscent of the original Max Lange Attack again) Nxd5 8.exd5 Nd4 9.a5 (9.Nxd4!?, 9.Ra3) Ba7 10.d6 Qf6 11.o-o Nxf3+ 12.Qxf3 Qxf3 13.gxf3 cxd6 14.Bd5 (Palkovi)

There are several books on the Evans. I own two, which don't have a particular good reputation: Botterill's Open Gambits and Palkovi's Italienische Partie und Evans Gambit.
One advice, more or less in line with TopNotch' remark. Do not try to memorize lines. It's useless. Try to find out typical combinations and in the quieter variations typical plans. Also try to find improvements and analyze them deeply and repeatedly. This also improves your tactical abilities and has two more benefits: you will get used to some important positions and maybe you will improve theory. Winning games with your own novelty is very satisfactory and perhaps more stimulating than solving x100 puzzles.
Finding and analyzing important games also helps, so get yourself a decent database and/or game collection. Also buy a good book on attacking chess in the middle game; the Dunnington one has received good reviews.

There are also several books on the Two Knights. As 4.Ng5 also is rather tactical, but with roles reversed, the same advice applies.

One last remark. Everybody says, that amateurs should play the Open Games to develop their tactical skills. Is this true? The Hungarian (3...Be7) and the Philidor (2...d6) are very positional.
You might 1.d4 d5 2.c4 give a thought instead! If Black plays ...dxc4, White can continue in mirrored King's Gambit style. Eg
2.c4 dxc4 3.Nf3 a6 4.e4 b5
2.c4 dxc4 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Nc3 a6 5.e4
2.c4 dxc4 3.Nf3 c6 4.e4
2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 dxc4 4.e4 or 4.Nf3 b5 5.a4 or 5.e4
2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Nf3 dxc4 5.e4.
In fact only the latter is rather dubious.
Of course Black has more options: the Meran, the Tarrasch, the Queen's Gambit Declined. In all cases White can play solid variations, but also sharper ones. Combined with the Trompovsky 1.d4 Nf6 2.Bg5 you will have a tactical repertoire. What do you think?