Markovich wrote on 07/05/13 at 03:05:09:


Haha, yeah it is a disease and unfortunately I am not entirely sure where I contracted it! 

However, after losing a couple blitz games yesterday with the Najdorf against players I would normally beat, and then briefly glancing at the daunting amount of theory (White has what, at least 10 set-ups in the Najdorf alone, plus all of the anti-Sicilians?) I have decided that trading the French for the Najdorf at this point simply makes no sense! My results with the French are better than they were with the Najdorf or 1...e5, so why switch? The Winawer, Nf6 Tarrasch, etc. are sharp enough for me (I have some problems in the Tarrasch but I think they can be remedied); and I have really great results with the Black Queen Blues Winawer (Moskalenko) even against players who are higher rated! And if I really need to avoid the exchange variation against a lower rated player, I will just outplay them in some equal Caro-Kann position instead! Oh, and the Caro and French COMBINED are less work than the Najdorf in terms of theory (and though I don't like to admit it, my play is actually much closer to Karpov's than it is to Tal's)!!

So, to conclude, I guess my "sharp" line will remain as the French -- especially against higher rateds, when I have a good chance of getting a Winawer -- and thus an interesting game. Why fix something that isn't broken? The Benoni will be my only fianchetto/hypermodern opening, but so what? It doesn't need a thematic partner!

So yeah, my thought process went full circle and at this point this thread is basically useless. However, I would eventually like to experiment with the Kan or Taimanov as they are appealing for a number of reasons! Not the Najdorf or Sveshnikov though! They are too much work, and don't really even suit me that well! 

Cheers!

Reading just now how this discusion has progressed since page 1, I just want to throw up. My views on what sub-2000 players should play are well known, so I won't repeat them. But what is it that leads so many club-level and below players to obsess so much over opening systems!? It's a disease! "Back to the Najdorf for the third time" and not even rated yet. Ye gods!

OT, but this is something I often think when I see posts such as those of the OP. 

If you are (say) a sub-2000 player who has played the Pirc, the Zaitsev, plays the Caro-Kann, two years ago was all about the French, is thinking about going back to the Najdorf for the third time, but possibly the Taimanov or Kan (plus whatever I may have missed), you might consider that it could be a good thing to stick with a given defense for, say, at least a few years.  But no doubt the opening-advocacy-product industry loves (people like) you!

Another thing just came to mind: 

Based on my past games with the Najdorf and the Pirc, I found that when White strayed from the beaten path early in the game, black often ended up with a better position (due to the two-pawn center, if nothing else); whereas if White deviated against the Pirc, he would usually still be at least equal (unless if it was a highly critical/tactical line, such as some of those found in the Austrian Attack).

In other words, I think the Najdorf simply demands a lot more precise and/or ambitious play from White than many Black defences, which may be another reason to go back to it.

Smyslov_Fan wrote on 07/04/13 at 16:54:03:


Yeah, I remember realizing that Tal, Fischer, and Topalov (all players whom I look up to) all pair the Benoni with the Sicilian when I first started playing those openings, which is incentive to go back to the Najdorf for the third time (I keep coming back to it somehow, after dabbling in many other things -- must be a good opening!). 

As far as the Spanish goes, I used to play the Black side of the Zaitsev (which can be quite benoni-like on the Q-side) but unfortunately I rarely got to play a mainline Zaitsev because white players would keep playing positional Ruy sidelines against me (which seem more straightforward for White, and are rather boring for Black, though objectively I think Black is okay)! Plus 1...e5 is a lot of work -- a little too much IMO for an "equalizing" opening that often leads to symmetrical/dry positions. I would rather just keep the Caro as my equalizer for the time being, and play something a little for imbalancing than 1...e5 as my other repertoire choice. Though, at my level I usually don't have problems winning with the Caro; I want to play two different defences more to keep the game interesting than because I need something sharp against weaker players...

I am not sure if there are any particular players I want to emulate when playing the Benoni... I am still learning much of the theory from the new book, but so far I am leaning towards mainlines except when they lead to drawish/simplified positions (I choose 9...Nh5 over the more mainstream 9...b5 in the Modern Mainline, for example). 

The Najdorf really is starting to sound like perhaps the best practical choice. When I played it I found I could maintain a relatively low-maintenance (at least for this particular opening!) repertoire by using ...e5 set-ups whenever possible, and an early ...h5 against the English Attack. I would also play Ftacnik's interesting 6...Nbd7 against 6...Bg5 (how's this line doing these days??) or the old 7...Qc7 line. And, besides, theory still is not of utmost importance at my level, so I am sure if I had my replies to 6.Bg5, 6.Be3, and 6.Bc4 down cold, I could survive the rest without too much prep/memory work.

Some of Ftacnik's choices against the Anti-Sicilians do not appeal to me though -- particularly his replies to the c3-Sicilian and the Moscow variation. Is the book "Experts vs the Anti-Sicilian" a good book choice for playing against these lines? I figure I would like to respond to the c3 Sicilian with 2...Nf6, and the Moscow with 3...Nbd7. 

The Sveshnikov is still tempting for its sheer dynamism and piece play, but for many reasons I just cannot see myself doing as well with it as most other openings.

The Q-side pawn structure of the Modern Benoni is very similar to that of the Spanish main lines. 

Two of the most famous Modern Benoni players of all time, Mikhail Tal and Veselin Topalov, played both the Black side of the Sicilian Najdorf and the Spanish extremely well. They both seemed to prefer the Sicilian, but showed they could play either well. Fischer, a Najdorf player, dabbled in the Modern Benoni, as did Spassky, a Spanish player. Kamsky was another who paired the Benoni and the Spanish.

As ErictheRed and many others have recommended in the past, select a player to model your own repertoire. If there is a particular interpretation of the Modern Benoni that you especially like, find out who plays it as Black and see what they preferred against 1.e4. 

LeeRoth wrote on 07/04/13 at 15:20:15:


I like "Dragon-type" set-ups for black, but am scared to death of the Yugoslav attack if I am being honest (I did very well on the White side of that opening when I played 1.e4, and didn't really have to know all that much theory to get a big attack). And as far as accelerated dragons go... I would just much rather be white in a the Maroczy bind.

After dusting off "The Pirc in Black and White" for the first time in a few years, I am definitely considering playing it with black. It often leads to both dragon and benoni type positions, and the Bishop on g7 seems to make it a reasonable Benoni companion. Still, I cannot help but feel a bit like I am playing an inferior Sicilian in some lines (say with opposite side castling, but a closed center and less piece activity). And, of course what do I do against 3.f3? I suppose I could go for a Saemisch KID and try to steer it into a Saemisch Benoni for Black, but then wouldn't I be giving White extra options such as exd5 later on (after ...e6 and ...exd5)? I play the Saemisch KID with White so perhaps this shouldn't be confusing, but it kind of is... 

The Najdorf is still quit tempting, even if a bit stale by now. I have a good feel for those kind of positions, so learning some concrete lines probably wouldn't be asking too much of myself...

As a companion to the Benoni, I would have thought the Dragon an obvious choice.  Unbalanced play, dark-square themes, Bg7, Black usually finds himself at some point relying on tactics . . .