fling wrote on 01/16/12 at 11:43:57:


Yes, I agree with you. Adams once stated that he felt not playing the Open Sicilian at a young age held his chess career back. Of course, in the case of a club player who is happy to get to say 2200 or 2300, it's possible to do so without playing main lines. 

@Markovich

It might be a good idea to move a large portion of this thread to a new topic in general chess, such as 'why people don't play main lines' or 'main line openings and chess improvement'.

TN wrote on 01/16/12 at 01:20:15:


Yes, sometimes people reach a certain level despite doing something wrong!

Maybe they would be better if they played real openings 

I find it difficult to imagine if Topalov, Kramnik, Grischuk, etc. could play the Colle/Torre/London or Wing Gambit for the rest of their careers and maintain 2700+ ratings.

I am sure titled players eventually had to learn main lines..

If you're young, look relatively well prepared and they think they can probably win via technique, then it just makes sense for them no? The frustration bit does at least seem to have worked

Most people playing sidelines though, do just play them vs everyone. Some of it maybe being scared of preparation (slightly absurd in context!). The prevelance of it does get annoying, although it does also mean that playing main lines gives you surprise value(!).
(not annoying cf results, just interest.).

It would be nice if more people played the main lines. I cannot remember myself ever regularly playing non-main line openings. I learnt the Slav and Taimanov and 1. e4 Open Sicilian and main lines when I first started tournament chess. The only time I played a non main line was when I played the Grand Prix Attack for fun, since it was the last round of a very bad tournament, and another loss would not have mattered to me (even though somehow I won that game). 

There are many ways for White to avoid the Breyer, which is a shame since I was considering learning it and it seems like an underrated variation. There are many deviations to achieve a Breyer, the first being 1. e4 e5 2. f4/2. Nc3/ 2. Bc4/2. d4/etc., the second being 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4/3. Bc4/3. c3/3. Nc3, and then the Exchange Spanish, Delayed Exchange Spanish, Worrall, 5. d3, 6. d3, 7. d3, 8. d3, 9. d4 Spanish, etc. Might as well just play the Berlin Wall...

I wonder what opponents who keep playing non-main lines think when playing against 2300+. I have played against a few Morra Gambits played by 2200-2300 players, winning all of them but one, where I was three pawns up in a winning endgame and then suddenly I started to hang my pieces due to stupidity.

But on topic of the Breyer, many players around my level still do not play the Ruy Lopez. If they do, it ends up being the Exchange Variation. Most of them play the Four Knights and Bishop's Opening. I suppose titled players will enjoy playing against those openings due to equalising more easily. But then the positions are not as interesting as the Breyer.

The 4NCL does not necessarily mean people will play main lines. Although even if one does not have time to prepare, I do not understand forgoing playing the main lines. Most of the time I do not have much time to prepare due to studies or being busy doing other things, but I still play the Najdorf and Grünfeld as Black and 1. d4 main lines as White, even without any preparation. I just rely on the opening variations I learnt however long ago that may be. I first learnt 1. d4 main lines three years ago, and I play it without preparation if I have to. Lack of preparation certainly does not make me want to play the Colle.