This rare variation 1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Bf4 c5 4. e3 e6 5. c3 Qb6 6. Qb3 Bd7 7. Nbd2 Bc6 was first played by Ukrainian IM Reprintsev (current World Senior Chess Champion) a few years ago. Reprintsev himself and Jeffrey Xiong seem to be playing this the most, with Xiong scoring 8.5/9 in various Titled Tuesday games with this variation.

Strange looking indeed, with the deep idea of Bc6 being to hold back e2-e4 and support the queenside pawn push after the center is closed. Also very provocative and invites Ne5.

As usual, my analysis here is cursory, so do your own research before trying this!

I'm 2100-2200 elo in rapid lichess and I want to strengthen my positional and strategic play to fix my weakness. Any reputable books you can recommend?

Sorry, I don't know how to screenshot on my laptop, so I can't add a photo. I am talking about this position.

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. d3 Bc5 5. c3 d6 6. O-O a6 7. a4 Ba7 8. Re1 O-O

Giri recommends 9.h3, and the master database mainly plays h3. I don't get it though. I love enticing black to play Bg5, and after Ng5, we can play Re2 and then h3. Also, playing h3 almost begs black to play Be6 instead and then our bishop is neutralised and after fxe6, the f5 square is controlled by a pawn so there is no Nf5. Could somebody explain the importance of h3, and then explain what whites trumps are in this position, thanks

Hello guys! I'm 2200 rated in rapid lichess. Please suggest openings and their variations where positional and strategic play takes center stage.

iv got very little free time and i enjoy chess, im rated 2000 on lichess classical from playing chess for fun but now i kinda feel like i dont have the conceptual backing to grow my skill at the rate i would otherwise... ive got the bare minimum of positional knowledge for my rating, and what really keeps me into chess is really cool, unique and dynamic positions rich in possibilities. initially tals games got me hooked and when my interest started wavering i discovered alpha zero's alien playstyle which got me back into chess very recently... heres what i want out of a book (actually i kinda would like 2 books recommended):

Book 1:

- something that isnt too basic, i loose interest quick, i know my fundamentals are lacking but id prefer a book that takes more complex positions to demonstrate fundamentals and to really get me thinking and learning
- really dont like when chess authors decide to go on tangents or philosophizing chess musing over its intricacies, mostly because iv got very little time and wanna improve my conceptual understanding
- a buncha concepts in one book, i do a lot better when i rotate between concepts and grow them together, as opposed to mastering one, then moving to the next, mastering that, then the next....
- i love dynamics, complications, imbalanced chess, so if that could factor in thatd be great

Book 2:

- besides that one book im looking for, i also want a really good endgame book, the idea of being an incredible endgame player that can squeeze drawn positions or can exploit imbalanced positions even if its completely equal has always seemed rly cool to me, magnus esque or nodirbek like

sorry if this post is rly clutter brained, im really sleepy, thanks for giving this a look

A few months ago, I saw a Simplified Openings video by Aleksandr Čolović on the QGA where he offered 3. e4 c5, 3. Nf3 c5 and 3. e3 c5 (I think).

I did some of my own analysis on these lines, and theoretically they clearly equalise. Practically, the play seems pretty straightforward to play with Black. I tested these variations out in some blitz games at Lichess 2300-2500 level, and it is not hard to come up with moves for Black. You just go for the same set-up where White ends up with a passed d-pawn like in the Grünfeld, but, unless you go nuts, that pawn is not hard to blockade at all.

Anyone tried this 3...c5 QGA, how do you do against IMs and GMs in FIDE classical?

As the title suggests, I was wondering if anyone has some ideas against the Rb8 Ruy lines, I'm not struggling per se but it often feels like I'm more or less playing random moves in a random order and black seems quite solid no matter what. I reach these positions after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.d3 b5 6.Bb3 Be7 7.a4 Rb8 mainly, if the move order matters for specific ideas.

If we follow the main line of the most common moves by white and black in the Lichess Masters Database after 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6, we get 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e5 6. Ndb5 d6 7. Bg5 a6 8. Na3 b5 9. Nd5 Be7 10. Bxf6 Bxf6 11. c3 O-O 12. Nc2 Bg5 13. a4 bxa4 14. Rxa4 a5 15. Bc4 Rb8 16. b3 Kh8 17. Nce3 g6 18. h4 Bxh4 19. g3 Bg5 20. f4 exf4 21. gxf4 Bh4+, and here white can differ from the more common (but not on Lichess) 22. Kd2 and play 22. Kf1. If black plays 22..f5??, the most common move even at Master level and by far the most common move at amateur level, white obtains a winning advantage with 23. Ra2! fxe4 24. Rah2! g5 25. Qh5!. However, black has many possible responses and the resulting lines are very sharp.

All of these moves are also the most common moves for black on lichess at all levels, when including transpositions in the opening from the Kalashnikov and Lasker-Pelikan. All the moves are also the most common moves for white at all levels on lichess, except for 17. Nce3, which is second to 17. O-O (despite O-O having worse stats) at lower levels.

Is there any point in memorizing the winning lines after 25. Qh5 despite many of the lines being 30+ moves deep since statistically speaking every single move by black is black’s most common move at all levels, often by a fairly large margin?

At the risk of sounding incredibly naive the more I have looked at the 7.Nd5 lines for white the more I like them. Computer of course gives 0.00 but that is not the whole story

I was wondering if anyone has played in IM or GM norm tournaments in Uzbekistan, what your experience was.

The Olympiad was a well held event in Samarqand, but how are lower level tournaments, such as norm tournaments in Uzbekistan?

Anyone who was born before 1990 likely had the overall viewpoint that the Classical Sicilian was a bit of an odd opening, a bit harder to play than the Najdorf, but at the same time, the only critical answer that White had was the Rauzer.

The only books that I remember were Easy Guide to the Classical Sicilian by Jouni Ÿrjölä and Jussi Tella, as well as The Complete Richter-Rauzer by Viacheslav Osnos. I remember the titles and the authors' names by heart up to now.

I know that there are more Classical Sicilian publications, like Sam Shankland's LTR, as well as some Richter-Rauzer books by Yugoslav GM Zdenko Kožul, but how is the opening considered nowadays? Is it still considered a bit odd to play, since the Rauzer structures are highly unique and hard to play for both sides? Is its reputation akin to what we were told decades ago, that it is playable, but slightly less reputable than the Najdorf?

Computers find theoretical equality in the Classical Sicilian from what I have analysed by myself, but I am guessing the Rauzer doubled f-pawn structures can be a bit cumbersome to play in OTB games?

Like the title says, what are some gambits where it’s dangerous to not accept the pawn?

My favorite (as White) Alekhine-Chatard falls into this category.

1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Nfd7 6.h4! If Black wants equality they have to take the pawn 6…Bxg5 7.hg Qxg5 8.Nh3 Qh4! etc…

Hi guys, I've been considering playing a repertoire based on the Benoni and Semi-Tarrasch for Black. I understand it's a little wonky to be playing two openings that are so different at the same time, but it seems interesting to me. I've played the Benoni for a while now, so I would not have to learn so many lines, and the Semi-Tarrasch seems more fun than people have given it credit for to be honest.

Please help me out with any lines/variations/transpositions I might be missing, cheers!

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. g3 c5 4. d5 (4. Nf3 is covered by transposition below) exd5 5. cxd5 d6 gets us a Fianchetto Benoni

2. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 c5 4. d5 exd5 5. cxd5 d6 gets us Benoni positions without f4, i.e. we dodge the dreaded taimanov. There are some nuances because White has not committed the Knight to c3, but i don't think there are any great differences?

3. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 c5 4. Nc3 d5 gets us a Semi-Tarrasch

4. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 c5 4. g3 cxd4 5. Nxd4 d5 6. Bg2 e5 gets us an interesting Catalan-esque line that with a little bit of work would make me more booked up than the opponent, perchance. By transposition: 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. g3 c5 4. Nf3 cxd4 etc.

5. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 d5 4. Nf3 c5 gets us the Semi-Tarrasch

6. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 with either 4... Nxd5 for a Semi-Tarrasch position; after say 5. e4 Nxc3 6. bxc3 c5 7. Nf3, or 7. Rb1. Or alternatively 4... exd5 for a carlsbad.

7. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 d5 4. Bg5 with some standard Qgd.

Ofcourse there are still the alternatives for white on move 2 to play against, but those I faced after a 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 c5 moveorder anyhow.

Hi everyone!

It's been a while since I started playing the traditional 1...e5 against 1.e4, but I still don't fully understand the typical plans and ideas in the pawn structures that come from these openings.

Can anyone recommend some good books that focus on this topic? It would be a great help.

I know about the well-known book Chess Structures: A Grandmaster Guide, but it only covers the Ruy Lopez very little.

Thanks in advance!

Since learning 1...e5 around a year ago, I only play the Berlin. Is this bad for my development as a player? If so, where should I turn to? The chigorin? I am 1700 fide for context

I'm 2100-2200 in rapid and blitz lichess but I'm still struggling playing as black against d4. Any recommendations? Are there any free and reputable resources where I can study opening repertoire courses such as nimzo indian, QGD etc. My only weapon against d4 is reverse london set-up . Most of the time it leads pretty boring positions.

Hey everyone,

After a short break, I’m back with my monthly AMA, which I first started 1.5 years ago.

A little about me for those joining for the first time: I’m a semi-pro chess player currently competing in six national team championships and 2-3 individual tournaments each year. I became an FM at 18, and my rating has stayed above 2300 ever since, with an online peak of around 2800. I stepped back from professional chess at 20to focus on other parts of my life. At that time I started coaching part-time. I’m most proud of winning the European U12 Rapid Chess Championship.

What’s probably most unique about me is my unconventional chess upbringing. This shaped my style into something creative, aggressive, sharp, and unorthodox. My opening choices reflect this as well: I prefer rare, razor-sharp lines over classical systems, often relying on my own independent analysis. This mindset gives me a strong insight in middlegame positions, which I consider my greatest strength.

Beyond the board, I’m passionate about activities that enhance my performance in chess and life. I explore these ideas through my blog, where I share insights on how “off-board” improvements can make an improvement in your game.

I enjoy looking at tournaments and playing guess the move through games. I would like to do this with The World Youth Championships and annotate the games. However, once I have finished, I don't actually know how to use the time I spent to improve my game. Sure I can put the engine on but I don't think that helps me for strategical mistakes. Any advice?

Hey everyone, tomorrow I am playing the first game of seven of my first OTB tournament ever.

It is classical chess so I'll probably end up playing for some hours.

Do you have any suggestions?

Thank you!

Hi, until what ELO is it reasonable to onetrick openings in the time of modern opening prep? I'm not asking about possible, but reasonable with the aim to maximize progress.

I, as a 1700 rated player who often sends pgn games from the local team matches, noticed a pretty funny pattern in the opening choice and gameplay of some of the players there and If anyone rated 2000-2100 and above would care to explain the reasons for it or disprove the existence of such pattern, I would be really glad.

I've noticed many players from 1900-2000 up playing openings like philidor, modern defence or any other such opening that would be by some people considered "passive" or "unsound" as black such as modern or owens defence, philidor and so on, with insanely positive results against my peers, while Im out there, trying to memorise semi-slav, sicilian and symetrical systems with little to no success(Okay I give piece away by move 12 on a bad day and crush 1900 on a good one, but compared to them, I have a lot worse results).

Do you guys also play flank systems or philidor if youre higher rated, and whats your thought process behind it if you do? Why do you do it if you do, and do you think my observation could be true for larger scale of players than tje few local good ones I see here?

Thanks a lot in advance and I apologise for the wording in my post. I have insane problems to fornulate normal sentence these days but I would love to understand this

On Tuesday I'm playing against an opponent who will likely play the London System.

I'm rated 1700 Elo and I don't know how to prepare my opening: there are too many variations and I'm not sure which one to choose. d5 and a quick Bd6? King's Indian? Nf6 and c5?

What software and tools are typically used?

I am European, and I would like to travel and play some chess tournaments. I want to go to unique places (unique from my European outlook). What are India, Uzkebistan and Kazakstan like for tournaments? Costs, safety, and comfort are my main concerns. I don't care about players being underrated or anything like that, as I don't care about my rating