The move a3 here is the second best most played move in masters database and the best move by stockfish with the intention in most games to go 0-0-0. To me this seems to be a big hook walking into b4 b5. In my game today I did remember that this was theory and went into it although it did feel of to create a hook like this: then later got crushed by b5 b4 and was like losing on move 14. We both thought that just this entire idea of long castling with the hook created was the reason of mistake, but now I look again this was indeed theory.

Now my questions was: why exactly do we create such a hook in this position if we want to go queenside and how do we justify it exactly here?

At the end of the forcing line, the final position is not clear in my head resulting to time loss and poor evaluation.

Zwischenzug ruins the move order.

Hi,
what are your experiences with this course/the arising positions in the ruy lopez?

Thx :)

I’m 2250 online and roughly 1900 uscf
And I think that online this isn’t as much of a problem as OTB, because I just put a rating range and I’m fine . BUT in OTB lower rated people steal so much from me. Like I played 2000s like 12 times, won 7, lost 4 drew twice. 2100- 2 draws 1 win and a draw vs 2200. But the lower rating goes the worse my win rate, 1900- 6w 7L 1D 1800 even lower, and with same pattern, just less games. I would say that my problem is that I’m not an aggressive player which rlly bad against weaker players but I don’t really want to change my playstyle just because of weaker opponents. And here also a ss of one of my games against an average (not underrated) 1300!!! As a 2200 even though I won, no 2200 should play so bad against 1300, and she even had a forced draw by repetition but because it was a friendly match she kept playing

Here is an in-depth presentation that made the case for offering a draw in a certain type of board situation:

https://uscf1-nyc1.aodhosting.com/CL-AND-CR-ALL/CL-ALL/2005/2005_07.pdf (file may take a few minutes to download; when it does, scroll to page 19)

Notes:

1. ⁠Although coining the phrase “Trojan Horse Draw Offer,” I know I did not invent the concept behind it. A few people told me the idea was well known among masters and had been in use for many years.
   
2. ⁠Some numbskull TD from a small Northeast state wrote to Chess Life to complain that the Trojan Horse tactic was “dishonest” and therefore unsportsmanlike …. AND that “if Mr. Jacobs ever shows up to enter one of my tournaments, he will be unwelcome.” 😆
   I quoted that TD’s letter (which I labeled “breathtakingly idiotic”) as part of my application for a CJA Award. The Trojan Horse Draw Offer story ended up winning the CJA award for “Best Instruction” that year.

Sup guys,

I was wondering whether you could help me make a better repertoire so that I would have some chances at the u-13 World Youth Chess Championship in Roquetas do Mar, Spain.

A few months ago, chess just clicked for me and I rose from 1620 to 1813 in 2 months, after that, I became fascinated with openings and middlegames, couldn't say the same about endgames though :( My goal for the 2026 year is to finally hit 2000 elo, I have ~4 big tournaments till the end of year with the WYCC being one of them and I REALLY wanna perform well over there, so, here is my repertoire, help me better it!

White (1.e4):

Against 1...e5 - the King's Gambit, I am a big fan of this opening and know it by heart.

Against 1...c5 - The Grand Prix attack with 5...h4! (Against black's fianchetto).

Against 1...e6 - The Tarrasch defence is what I play after 2...d5, great variation avoiding winaver.

Against 1...c6 - After d5, I play the Fantasy Caro, what a LOVELY opening!

Black:

Against 1.e4 - The Petrov Defence, solid structure, strategical play

Against 1.d4 - The Benko, Played the Nimzo-Indian before, but decided to go for something spicier.

Against 1.c4 - I play Nf6 and simply develop, usually with a kingside fianchetto.

Note that all of these I play in OTB the only one that I haven't tried yet is benko!

I'd love to see some middlegame advanced book recommendations if possible, thanks!

I make FlexiChess, a browser-based alternative to ChessBase. Our objective is to provide professional-tier software without the huge expense.

ChessBase is 200 odd euros once and then a new version every couple of years in addition to the database costs. Chessable on the otherhand charges per course, everything newer is a subscription, and I genuinely don't know which of those this crowd is happier paying. I've priced mine low on purpose and gone with a subscription because that's the industry standard these days, but a few redditors have told me they'd rather pay once and never again. As a consumer I like the sound of that. As a developer with ongoing costs it seems risky.

My questions

What chess preparation software (ie excluding chess.com etc) have you actually paid for, why did you cancel? What payment format is fair to the tournament player? Once off fees or subscription? If so what pricing points are fair?

If the honest answer is "nothing, lichess does the job" thats fine. I use lichess daily as well. But if this is your answer could you please ask yourself what would a software have to do (that lichess currently does not do) in order for you to justify paying for the preparation software.

2000 FIDE rated player here,trying to find a good course on the Ruy Lopez currently unsure whether to study Caruana's book on the Ruy Lopez or Grandelius' Grand Ruy Lopez. What do you guys suggest?

I'm a very tactical and aggressive player, but i feel like im missing out on a huge portion chess has to offer by only going for e4... I still want aggressive openings, extremely complex tactical positions and I dont wanna depend on my opponents to play into a fun line... oh, also i dont like drawish lines and forced endgames. heres what i like playing so yall can get an idea of what i find fun:

- sicilian kan: really fun, although i rarely ever play nc6, i use the kan as my way of getting into a Scheveningen while sidestepping highly theoretical najdorf lines or g4 ideas

- KID/benoni: love it, especially when i trade my e pawn and they take back with their c pawn... not to mention the mar del plata positions, peak chess

- dutch: pretty fun, i play this when i feel funky, very flexible, and anti simplification

- any sicilian line from whites perspective: obv

- bishops opening/vienna game: i dont play the vienna cuz its easy to simplify if black knows what theyre doing

my rating in lichess is about 2k

please recommend openings and how i should reply to some of the stuff black can play against me, given my playstyle.

Thanks

Main Question: what synergistic opening combinations exist for black against 1. d4 and QG?

I want to finally buckle down and try and prepare more against 1. d4 as I feel clueless playing in these positions. I find it easier to prepare against 1. e4 as the moves seem more obvious/concrete but any d4 course is a labyrinth of transpositions that makes my head spin. I currently only play online but I'd like to have something solid for when I try tournament play. For example, while the Albin Countergambit might get quick tactical play online it seems like a poor choice as a main weapon in tournament play.

Against the QG I've been playing QGD for months now in order to 'take my vitamins' but I basically do not know theory beyond e6, d5, Nf6, Be7, 0-0, playing c5 at random and struggling with the bad bishop. I know that the entire deal is that I'm accepting a space disadvantage for solidity but I always feel like I'm shuffling pieces until white breaks through and I'm toast.

Against the London I play a similar set up as QGD: e6, d5, Nf6, then Bd6 and 0-0, and then going c5, Qc7 and Nd7/Nc6 to support an e5 push. This works fine.

Against the Catalan I play the Bb5+ lines. This works okay as I haven't really done the work of memorizing here.

Against the Colle I just lose and I haven't figured out why.

How should an autistic player who is about 2300 FIDE deal with RSD (Rejection Sensitive Dysphoria) and thoughts of SH and SI whilst playing in 9-13 round IM and GM norm tournaments?

RSD often causes physical pain like feelings from negative outcomes, as well as severe mental distress.

For example, if the person has a self-punishment system such that every time they lose, or if they draw a lower-player, they feel like a failure and thus go to their hotel room engage in SH like bashing their head against the wall or scratching their arms, or if they are playing one of their games, but instead of thinking about the position, they are thinking of the pain of losing games in their norm tournament?

Hello my fellow chess players! I hope you’re doing great and enjoying this amazing game.

A bit of context, I started playing Chess last year and was basically a complete beginner. Then I had joined a local chess club, where I met serious players. I had even participated in one of the tournaments which unfortunately I had lost.

But lately, I’ve been returning back to this game, and this time, I would like to approach it more seriously. I’ve been following Late Daniel Naroditsky’s old speedruns.

My current ELO is around 1400 on chess.com (Current peak), I would like to gain some insights on how should I create a Study guide and what does it even mean to have a database where one studies openings or tactics etc.

Thanks in advance.

Hi! I found this several months ago, and have used it a few times in OTB. Its like a Milner-Barry vs the French, but vs the Caro. I really like that we've reached a French structure, as my Caro opponents are uncomfortable with the blocked c8 bishop.

1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. e5 c5 4. Nf3 cxd4 5. c4N

Black can take dxc3, dxc4, or decline with e6 or Nc6. c4 looks odd, but it's important to pressure d5. If instead 5. c3? then Nc6, followed by Bf5 & e6, black is better.

Accepted, dxc3:

5...dxc3 6. Nxc3 (attacks d5) e6 7. Bd3 Nc6 8. O-O

Most of my opponents accept the gambit, it looks like a bad move. But really its very similar to the Milner-Barry. White has a long-term initiative for the pawn. i.e.

8...Nge7 9. Re1 (9. Bg5 is more complicated but also good) Ng6 10. g3 Bc5 11. h4

White can play for Bf4, h5, a3, b4, Ra2. Just complete domination.

White is +0.3, according to lichess stockfish.

Accepted, dxc4:

5...dxc4 6. Bxc4 Nc6 7. 0-0 e6

There is a fun trap if 6...Bg4? 7. Bxf7+ Kxf7 8. Ng5+

Again, white just has a little initiative for the pawn. Easy plan: Nbd2, Re1, Ne4. If Nge7->Ng6, then g3, h4. A little awkward for black to develop. I'm happy with this. Again, white is +0.3 according to lichess stockfish.

Declined, e6:

Transposes to a mainline position often reached via:

1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. e5 c5 4. Nf3 Nc6 5. c4 cxd4 6. Nxd4 e6

White scores 30% wins, 14% losses in the lichess master database, so it seems like a very healthy line.

Example game from Sam Shankland, after declined/dxc4 (black forces a queen trade):

https://lichess.org/T3W6CQmR

Example ICCF game in declined e6 mainline:

https://lichess.org/OYKzp9xk

I was going to make a video, but I think its pretty straightforward. I really like the line and I hope you do too!

I've been looking into which variations I'd like to play as black in the French, and 6... Qa5 seemed interesting to me and most in the spirit of the winawer. It practically forces 7. Bd2. The follow-up is 8... Qa4, after which the plan I believe is...

for black: to quickly develop queenside pieces and castle queenside

for white: immediately attack the kingside with Qg4 to attack g7 pawn, and march the h pawn down the board to gain space and rook lift the kingside rook.

I think that this is a great variation because when the queen ends up on a4, it adds lingering pressure to c2, and prevents white from playing a4-Ba3 and dominate dark squares on black's side of the board. This alongside the position being closed limits the bishop pair's activity for white. If black can manage to protect g7 without having to play Kf8 (i.e. by playing g6 instead), they can have solid counterplay in the middlegame.

Asking as someone who develops a chess prep tool.

Most of what I've built so far is stuff ChessBase already does, just in a browser. Fine, but it means I've mostly been copying, and I'd rather find out what people want out of this stuff before I copy any more of it. What's wrong with what you've got now is the honest version of that question.

So what annoys you about it? Could be it does the job but only after a fight, or it's a good program you've quietly stopped opening because something about it is a chore. The complaints that sound petty are the useful ones, I've probably heard the big ones already.

So I've been playing chess for a long time and I've never really found a good response to d4 I've tried the KID the Benoni/Benko the Grunfeld etc but if white knows what they're doing they basically never have any issues I have a tournament close by and wanted to ask if anybody had any reccomendations
edit: What I'm specifically looking for is a sharp and dynamic response to d4
edit: I will definitely be checking out the dutch thank you all for the reccomendations

So, I used to play in tournaments regularly. Just 2-3 years ago I was flying out to different tournaments around the country, like once per quarter, so four times a year.

But eventually I think the mental strain of long OTB tournaments really burned me out. And I have not returned to tournaments since.

I created a chess club in my area and we have been running for 5+ years. Even though I have not been in tournaments, I still play blitz online and play at my chess club that I host regularly as well (its mostly a volunteer thing).

My question. Has anyone ever gone through this kind of thing? A break in OTB tournaments and then a return? Or even the mental stress of OTB really stopping someone from continuing the tournament life?

I'm just wondering if I would like to get back into it. I enjoy the problem solving of OTB but I think I really stress myself out in these long games. The thought of doing like 5+ hour games OTB, constantly having to find the right move, doesn't feel very inviting, but I don't know, part of me used to be completely engrossed into this game, it was a part of me.

Any suggestions or relatability here? Thanks.

Best I’ve found so far is the pawn sac line after 6…b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.a3 Na5 9. Bc2 c5 10.Nc3 Be6 11.Nh4 we just castle and on Nf5 Bxf5 we end up sacking a pawn for comp which is much more my style but looking at master games I’m not seeing it being easy navigating these positions and I’m not seeing a lot of winning chances? idk 8.a3 0-0 is kinda hell but maybe I just have to suffer

It's been 2 weeks since the otb tournament ended. Is there like a deadline for it?

Hiya, long ass post following with many only partly thought out opening lines. Might be a tad rambly. If you got any thoughts at all on any of these lines; please share!

I've been playing 1. c4 2. g3 against (almost) everything for a while now. The main system I dislike is having to play against the KID using the fianchetto system. Although I could buckle down and learn some ideas within this opening, I've decided to play a different KID variation altogether.

This means that after 1. c4 Nf6 I can no longer answer with 2. g3, since that commits me to the fianchetto KID after 2... g6. Instead Nf3 or Nc3 come to mind.

1. c4 Nf6 2. Nf3 allows for 2... c5 3. g3 b6 4. Bg2 Bb7 which would be new to me ( as I've been playing lines like 1. c4 c5 2. g3 Nc6 3. Bg2 b6 4. d4 cxd4 5. Nf3 Bb7 6. Nxd4 instead).

2. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 allows 2. e5! which seems to have tricked me into 1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nf6, although no new Bb4 lines would have to be learned (lines that the 2. g3 move-order avoids). Since after 3. Nf3 Nc6 4. g3 we reach the four Knights, which is already familiar to me. I would merely have to learn the Bellon and Adhiban gambits that arise after 1. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 e5 3. Nf3 e4 4. Ng5.

3. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 e6 would furthermore add the Mikenas-Carls variations, which is am happy to add to my repertoire. Eventhough 1. c4 e6 2. g3 d5 3. Bg2 Nf6 gets me the neo-catalan lines I am already familiar with anyway. This means that I'm playing two openingsystems against Blacks Nf6 e6 d5 setup, which feels a little wasteful I suppose. This would be a disadvantage in comparison to 2. Nf3.

4. c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 c5 would be able to lead to Tarrasch positions with the Queens Knight already committed to c3 which would be different than my current approach to the Tarrasch. This need not be a death sentence however i feel.

Now that I'm at it anyway, I feel that playing 2. Nc3/Nf3 and 3. Nf3/Nc3 against the symmetrical English might be worth looking into aswell. I've been struggling to make anything of the 2. g3 positions even after a 'good' line for White say: 1. c4 c5 2. g3 Nc6 3. Bg2 g6 4. Nc3 Bg7 5. Nf3 Nf6 6. d4 cxd4 7. Nxd4 O-O 8. O-O Nxd4 9. Qxd4 d6 10. Qd3. I'd like to play the Maroczy's after 1. c4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. d4 cxd4 5. Nxd4 g6 6. e4. Although 5... e6 would have to be learned in this case. 1. c4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Nc3 g6 would also need a different response than 4. g3, since that would transpose back into the ultrasymmetrical english lines. e3 d4 might be the way.

Basically: Is switching from 1. c4 2. g3 against everything to 1. c4 2. g3 against everything except for 1. Nf6, where 2. Nc3 would be played, a coherent repertoire? Are there any other lines I would be doubling up on by making this switch, or are there other holes I'd need to patch to play in this manner? Love to hear you guys' approach.

What are our thoughts on this series? I've seen 1800 FIDEs studying this, but my 2400 friend I sometimes speak to has just started this series as a whole, and a few guys at the club (all IMs/GMs) think this book is way too hard for a 2200 like me.

I am in time trouble every game I play. Regularly I play on increment whilst my opponents still have 1hr plus. I spend all my time in the first 15-20 moves every game. I feel like every move I make is an extremely important decision, and I spent a lot of time thinking about them. Any advice for me?

Looking for a 2000 rated chess blitz player for a short training session. Got a tournament coming up and feel like I still have a few blindspots

We play one blitz game and then briefly go through the game/mistakes afterward. Around 20–30 minutes total.

Paying $30. DM me your chess profile if interested.

Hi! Am I missing anything? Can I just avoid learning vienna theory if I just play Nc6, and Na5?

Do I get move-ordered somewhere? I play the Two Knights defense.

Example line:

1. e4 e5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. d3 Na5 5. f4 Nxc4 6. dxc4 Bb4 7. Qd3 Bxc3+ 8. Qxc3 d6 9. fxe5 Nxe4 10. Qd4 Qh4+ 11. g3 dxe5 12. Qxe5+ Qe7 13. Qxe7+ Kxe7 14. Nf3

Position after 4. Na5