e4 e5 players - how deep is your prep? • page 1/2 • General Chess Discussion • lichess.org

I know that some people say that you shouldn't play the Sicilian as black because there are so many options for white and you'll need to know loads of theory to survive. But there seem to be just as many tricky options for white after e5, and no-one says the same about that.

So my question is - if you play e5 as black against 1 e4, and don't go into something like Petroff's or Philidor's that cuts down the possibilities a lot, how many of white's options do you actually feel like you're somewhat prepared for, either from having specifically sat down to learn theory or from experience in previous games, and how many would you have to basically work out for yourself from move three?

A quick survey of white's options is something like this:
King's Gambit
Bishop's Opening / Urusov Gambit
Danish Gambit
Vienna Game
Ruy Lopez
Italian Game - slow with d3
Italian Game with a quick d4 (Greco Gambit, Sveshnikov e5 line etc)
Evans Gambit
Scotch Game
Four Knights
Goring Gambit
Scotch Gambit
Ponziani's Opening
which seems like a lot!

I know that some people say that you shouldn't play the Sicilian as black because there are so many options for white and you'll need to know loads of theory to survive. But there seem to be just as many tricky options for white after e5, and no-one says the same about that. So my question is - if you play e5 as black against 1 e4, and don't go into something like Petroff's or Philidor's that cuts down the possibilities a lot, how many of white's options do you actually feel like you're somewhat prepared for, either from having specifically sat down to learn theory or from experience in previous games, and how many would you have to basically work out for yourself from move three? A quick survey of white's options is something like this: King's Gambit Bishop's Opening / Urusov Gambit Danish Gambit Vienna Game Ruy Lopez Italian Game - slow with d3 Italian Game with a quick d4 (Greco Gambit, Sveshnikov e5 line etc) Evans Gambit Scotch Game Four Knights Goring Gambit Scotch Gambit Ponziani's Opening which seems like a lot!

hendrixmaine

#2

This is a big part of why I don't play 1...e5.

Guicco Piano! (oof)

Prep shmep. The nice thing about 1...e5 is that the positions aren't too sharp to figure out reasonable moves over the board, and if you know key positional concepts in the main openings (Ruy, Italian, Scotch) you can apply them across the board.

Fantasy_Variation

#6

@RamblinDave said in #1:

So my question is - if you play e5 as black against 1 e4, and don't go into something like Petroff's or Philidor's that cuts down the possibilities a lot, how many of white's options do you actually feel like you're somewhat prepared for, either from having specifically sat down to learn theory or from experience in previous games, and how many would you have to basically work out for yourself from move three?

I've started playing e5 about 3 months ago and have been preparing against the various stuff that white can throw at you with e4...Am working on the Petroff so there are somewhat fewer lines than the Ruy Lopez/Spanish.

I've prepared against ALL of white's lines. You have to. I've spent time learning the theory around 5-10 moves deep depending on the variation and deeper for the 3 main variations of the Petroff. I'm not saying I remember all of it but am getting more comfortable with the main ideas behind each.

You need to have a certain level of familiarity against everything. Can't just make things up if your opponent has studied his lines.

Started out preparing against the Gambits - Kings and Danish. Those are certainly fun. Even have Halloween Gambit and Belgrade Gambit in there plus Cochrane Gambit .

Also worked on Four Knights/Scotch. You end up having to prepare against the Four Knights Spanish as well.

I avoid the Italian Game lines cause that's a whole lot of stuff to learn as well so always take on e4 if I can. That limits the variations to some extent.

Then you have various Petroff side lines before you get to the 3 main versions of the Petroff.

It's quite exhausting but it's what you have to do when you want to get a title. You have to be better prepared than your opponent and also have a better understanding of resulting end and middle games that emerge from them. Play a lot of practice games with those lines exactly for that reason.

Was previously a Sicilian player but never prepared as systematically. Had mostly learnt from experience over the years plus watching some videos. Used to play the Schevenigen but at higher levels, it's not as strong. Switched to Classical Sicilian and even here, you need to really study your stuff as there is a LOT of theory to learn. With Najdorf there's 10 times more theory.

Short answer, you HAVE to spend time studying if you want to play it at a high level. At lower levels you can get away with a lot more.

@RamblinDave said in #1: > So my question is - if you play e5 as black against 1 e4, and don't go into something like Petroff's or Philidor's that cuts down the possibilities a lot, how many of white's options do you actually feel like you're somewhat prepared for, either from having specifically sat down to learn theory or from experience in previous games, and how many would you have to basically work out for yourself from move three? I've started playing e5 about 3 months ago and have been preparing against the various stuff that white can throw at you with e4...Am working on the Petroff so there are somewhat fewer lines than the Ruy Lopez/Spanish. I've prepared against ALL of white's lines. You have to. I've spent time learning the theory around 5-10 moves deep depending on the variation and deeper for the 3 main variations of the Petroff. I'm not saying I remember all of it but am getting more comfortable with the main ideas behind each. You need to have a certain level of familiarity against everything. Can't just make things up if your opponent has studied his lines. Started out preparing against the Gambits - Kings and Danish. Those are certainly fun. Even have Halloween Gambit and Belgrade Gambit in there plus Cochrane Gambit . Also worked on Four Knights/Scotch. You end up having to prepare against the Four Knights Spanish as well. I avoid the Italian Game lines cause that's a whole lot of stuff to learn as well so always take on e4 if I can. That limits the variations to some extent. Then you have various Petroff side lines before you get to the 3 main versions of the Petroff. It's quite exhausting but it's what you have to do when you want to get a title. You have to be better prepared than your opponent and also have a better understanding of resulting end and middle games that emerge from them. Play a lot of practice games with those lines exactly for that reason. Was previously a Sicilian player but never prepared as systematically. Had mostly learnt from experience over the years plus watching some videos. Used to play the Schevenigen but at higher levels, it's not as strong. Switched to Classical Sicilian and even here, you need to really study your stuff as there is a LOT of theory to learn. With Najdorf there's 10 times more theory. Short answer, you HAVE to spend time studying if you want to play it at a high level. At lower levels you can get away with a lot more.

bernkastelhues