|
Main
Date: 02 Aug 2008 16:19:01
From: John Salerno
Subject: 1 ... e5
|
So I'm studying openings right now (which is interesting and at the same time a little boring, since it doesn't seem like this is where you're actually "playing" chess yet) and I was thinking about this move. It seems to be the standard first move for Black (assuming, I suppose, that White opens with e4) and I was just thinking that there seems to be something really elegant about this move. As simple as it is, it just seems like a beautiful combination of offense and defense (controlling the central square, preventing White from moving d5, opening up your king's bishop's line, and of course blocking White on e4). I don't know why I'm posting about this...it's just a thought. Although I have to admit it seems a little strange to find a chess move so fascinating. And I'm sure there are plenty of others that I'll be impressed with too, once I start learning more. :)
|
|
|
Date: 03 Aug 2008 11:18:52
From:
Subject: Re: 1 ... e5
|
On Aug 2, 4:19=A0pm, John Salerno <[email protected] > wrote: > So I'm studying openings right now (which is interesting and at the same > time a little boring, since it doesn't seem like this is where you're > actually "playing" chess yet) and I was thinking about this move. It > seems to be the standard first move for Black (assuming, I suppose, that > White opens with e4) and I was just thinking that there seems to be > something really elegant about this move. > > As simple as it is, it just seems like a beautiful combination of > offense and defense (controlling the central square, preventing White > from moving d5, opening up your king's bishop's line, and of course > blocking White on e4). > > I don't know why I'm posting about this...it's just a thought. Although > I have to admit it seems a little strange to find a chess move so > fascinating. And I'm sure there are plenty of others that I'll be > impressed with too, once I start learning more. :) It's not strange, it just indicates your interest in chess is deep and genuine. Some of the questions you ask remind me of my own thoughts when I first started studying chess seriously, in my teens decades ago. By all means, continue to be fascinated, because that will motivate you to learn. Personally, I am not fond of 1...e5 as a reply to 1.e4, but this is due to personal taste and inclination, not to any objective fault with the move. The two main reasons are: (1) I enjoy more the sort of game arising from the Sicilian Defense (1.e4 c5), and (2) To be a good 1...e5 player, one must study much more opening theory. After 1.e4 e5, White has so many playable lines: the Vienna, the Ruy Lopez, the Giuoco Piano, the Evans Gambit, the many forms of the King's Gambit, the Center Game, the Goering Gambit, the Danish Gambit, the Four Knights, the Bishop's Opening, etc. etc. You can limit White's options by playing the Petroff (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6), Philidor's Defense (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6), the wild and crazy Latvian Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.f3 f5?!) or a few other oddball lines, any of which eliminate the need to study the 1.e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 lines, but that still leaves a heck of a lot of "book" to study. And going unbooked into some Danish, Goering, or King's Gambit lines is like jumping into cactus naked. In contrast, with the asymmetrical KP lines such as the Sicilian, French, Caro-Kann, Alekhine, or Scandinavian, you limit White's options and thus lessen the amount of study required to play the opening well. But that's just my inclination and opinion. You should play and study chess in the way most interesting and enjoyable to you.
|
|
Date: 02 Aug 2008 21:10:03
From: help bot
Subject: Re: 1 ... e5
|
On Aug 2, 4:19=A0pm, John Salerno <[email protected] > wrote: > So I'm studying openings right now (which is interesting and at the same > time a little boring, since it doesn't seem like this is where you're > actually "playing" chess yet) and I was thinking about this move. It > seems to be the standard first move for Black For some time now, the favorite move has actually been 1. ... c5, the Sicilian Defense. In the old days, ... e5 was dogmatically recommended and the thinking was that Black should not be "playing to win", but merely to equalize. > (assuming, I suppose, that > White opens with e4) and I was just thinking that there seems to be > something really elegant about this move. > > As simple as it is, it just seems like a beautiful combination of > offense and defense (controlling the central square, preventing White > from moving d5, opening up your king's bishop's line, and of course > blocking White on e4). But what about handing the move back to White in a symmetrical position? If there is a win, White get's to "find it" first. And if there isn't, then why so much hoopla over a move which is just a copy? Many years ago, there was a lot of yap about how great 1. e4 supposedly was for White; but actual results did not bear this hype out, and in fact some moves which had been dismissed by the talking heads proved to yield superior results in various objective (if imperfect) tests. > I don't know why I'm posting about this...it's just a thought. Although > I have to admit it seems a little strange to find a chess move so > fascinating. And I'm sure there are plenty of others that I'll be > impressed with too, once I start learning more. :) Single moves can be rather dull in comparison to combinations. But as you seem to be fascinated with this 1. e4 e5 stuff, I highly recommend the games of Paul Morphy, whose style (especially with the Black pieces) was pleasing, aggressive, energetic and yet sound. In any case, he was a master of tactics-- and chess is, after all, 91.3% tactics. -- help bot
|
| |
Date: 03 Aug 2008 13:13:54
From: help bot
Subject: Re: 1 ... e5
|
On Aug 3, 12:37=A0am, John Salerno <[email protected] > wrote: > help bot wrote: > > and chess is, after all, 91.3% tactics. > > And the rest? :) Strategy. Actually, I left out psychology, playing the opponent rather than the board, and a few other things. If you toss in psychology, the numbers change. -- help bot
|
| |
Date: 03 Aug 2008 00:37:15
From: John Salerno
Subject: Re: 1 ... e5
|
help bot wrote: > and chess is, after all, 91.3% tactics. And the rest? :)
|
|
Date: 03 Aug 2008 01:31:28
From: ibarix
Subject: Re: 1 ... e5
|
"John Salerno" <[email protected] > wrote in message news:[email protected]... > So I'm studying openings right now (which is interesting and at the same > time a little boring, since it doesn't seem like this is where you're > actually "playing" chess yet) and I was thinking about this move. It seems > to be the standard first move for Black (assuming, I suppose, that White > opens with e4) and I was just thinking that there seems to be something > really elegant about this move. > > As simple as it is, it just seems like a beautiful combination of offense > and defense (controlling the central square, preventing White from moving > d5, opening up your king's bishop's line, and of course blocking White on > e4). > > I don't know why I'm posting about this...it's just a thought. Although I > have to admit it seems a little strange to find a chess move so > fascinating. And I'm sure there are plenty of others that I'll be > impressed with too, once I start learning more. :) 1...c5 is batter :)
|
|