Openings needed please

Hi i am 1750-1800 rated and im looking for openings. Im a very aggresive player so if there are aggresive unsound gambits i would like to have a look. Normal openings for my level would also count
Thanks in advance

iCANThiccupANYMORE

I would play the Ruy Lopez 1775 variation, and then spice it up with the QGD 1799 variation.

Akbar2thegreat

King's Gambit like a boss!
But Bird Opening often lead to sharp play and I am pretty used to it.

King's Gambit like a boss! But Bird Opening often lead to sharp play and I am pretty used to it.

iCANThiccupANYMORE

But you need a couple burritos to pull off the Busch-Gass Gambit.

metsfan27

As Black:

Stafford Gambit: 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 Nc6 4. Nxc6 dxc6

Lines vary after.

As Black:

Blackburne-Kostić Gambit: 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 4. Bc4 Nd4 5. Nxe5 Qg5

Lines vary after.

But after 6. Nxf7 Qxg2, Black is just completely destroying White. Then, after 7. Rf1 Qxe4, you are guaranteed mate. No matter where they play (Qe2 and Be2 are the two choices) 8. Nf3# is mate and you win the game.

After 5. Bxf7 you play 5. Bxf7 Kd8 you're basically just winning. The computer says -0.7 but after 6. O-O you can just take the knight on e5 and you have a knight to two pawns. In that position, Black wins 46% of the time. I don't know why it isn't higher but whatever.

Generally, the Blackburne-Kostić Gambit is harmless, the worst that can happen is a +1.7 advantage to White.

In the Stafford Gambit, the advantage to White can get very high, but in a level below maybe 2000 lichess elo, in blitz or bullet, black wins half the time on the Lichess database. However, in my experience, I generally win games that I play the Stafford. I have a win percentage of 64% when I play the Stafford. But I'm only 1500 so I'm not completely sure of course

As Black: Stafford Gambit: 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 Nc6 4. Nxc6 dxc6 Lines vary after. As Black: Blackburne-Kostić Gambit: 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 4. Bc4 Nd4 5. Nxe5 Qg5 Lines vary after. But after 6. Nxf7 Qxg2, Black is just completely destroying White. Then, after 7. Rf1 Qxe4, you are guaranteed mate. No matter where they play (Qe2 and Be2 are the two choices) 8. Nf3# is mate and you win the game. After 5. Bxf7 you play 5. Bxf7 Kd8 you're basically just winning. The computer says -0.7 but after 6. O-O you can just take the knight on e5 and you have a knight to two pawns. In that position, Black wins 46% of the time. I don't know why it isn't higher but whatever. Generally, the Blackburne-Kostić Gambit is harmless, the worst that can happen is a +1.7 advantage to White. In the Stafford Gambit, the advantage to White can get very high, but in a level below maybe 2000 lichess elo, in blitz or bullet, black wins half the time on the Lichess database. However, in my experience, I generally win games that I play the Stafford. I have a win percentage of 64% when I play the Stafford. But I'm only 1500 so I'm not completely sure of course

Nisko1234 edited

Gambits, look, I'm no fan of it, so I'm probably not the best source, but I'll speak anyways - that's what I do when not knowing something.

I think you use a 'Nakhmanson-Urusov-Max Lange Attack' - depends on what your opponent plays. Stafford Gambit is popular.
Leonhardt Gambit against Scandi' Qa5 is My weapon of choice, also Nakamura's - we're the same level so I mentioned him.

There are gambits and counter-gambits:
King's Gambit - Falkbeer Countergambit
Benko Gambit - Nescafe Frappe Attack

But again, I suck at it, therefore - not the source, ask @Adam_Prikler - he's strong at that.

Nowadays there's a Busch Gass Gambit.

Basically, you wanna choose gambits that declining them would be bad, or just impossible.
The least a gambit is known, the more your opponent is likely to fall in it, but the Evans' Gambit is the father of them all - it can't be refuted effectively, and Black MUST return the pawn, but of course, since it's so famous - Lasker made a refutation to it, so don't hold your breath.

Jonathan Schrantz - his Beaver Gambit and something else were actually used in serious tournaments.
And his Orthoschnapp Gambit is almost 'world-famous' - this Can be refuted, but it takes the fake-mustache out of the French Defense - no solidity. (same goes for Exchange French, but you wanted gambits) You opponent may be a smart-@ss and play c5, so you need to check with Mr. Comp. - you're winning, but the game becomes mutually ugly. The effective refutation to the gambit is in the following:
https://old.chesstempo.com/gamedb/game/5189635/ply/7
But nobody knows it except for Jobava.

"Someone Just Played My Trap in the British Championship" to look at Youtube, against Caro Kann.

Btw, against CK - if you think your opponent won't know the Botvinnik-Carls var (you Know what I talk about 'cause I said so), just do 'The Gotham':
" CRUSH The Caro-Kann with WGM Nemo Zhou " in Youtube. Your opponent won't know what fell on him. "What? CK! - The most solid defense, how come?!"

Now that you know I'm smug. er, smart, let's go to openings.

Against e4:
Sicilian Najdorf, and learn the sidelines. - Lord Stronghold - free, on chessable.

If you want a Dragon, the best objectively is the Acc. Dragon. But I'd give a chance to the Chinese Dragon because you have an attack for sure - no pawns to block your rooks, and almost no one except Carlsen and GM Bryan Smith knows of its existence. happy sac.ing!
There's also a Drago-dorf if you like the restraining a6 move.

Against d4:
I don't usually suggest doubious things to people, the best gambit-like opening to feat your style is the Budapest Gambit.

Against London System, I believe Gotham and Agadmator, but top players play a KID setup - it screws both Londoner's bishops and easily prepare to pinch the pyramid at the top.

As White...
Well, since you're an aggressive player, I must suggest the Adhiban b3 course (chessable) - be a cowboy and Nimzo-Larsen your opponents!

Adhiban is so cool, that he's cooler than Me. Fair is fair - he's the cooler person.

Gambits, look, I'm no fan of it, so I'm probably not the best source, but I'll speak anyways - that's what I do when not knowing something. I think you use a 'Nakhmanson-Urusov-Max Lange Attack' - depends on what your opponent plays. Stafford Gambit is popular. Leonhardt Gambit against Scandi' Qa5 is My weapon of choice, also Nakamura's - we're the same level so I mentioned him. There are gambits and counter-gambits: King's Gambit - Falkbeer Countergambit Benko Gambit - Nescafe Frappe Attack But again, I suck at it, therefore - not the source, ask @Adam_Prikler - he's strong at that. Nowadays there's a Busch Gass Gambit. Basically, you wanna choose gambits that declining them would be bad, or just impossible. The least a gambit is known, the more your opponent is likely to fall in it, but the Evans' Gambit is the father of them all - it can't be refuted effectively, and Black MUST return the pawn, but of course, since it's so famous - Lasker made a refutation to it, so don't hold your breath. Jonathan Schrantz - his Beaver Gambit and something else were actually used in serious tournaments. And his Orthoschnapp Gambit is almost 'world-famous' - this Can be refuted, but it takes the fake-mustache out of the French Defense - no solidity. (same goes for Exchange French, but you wanted gambits) You opponent may be a smart-@ss and play c5, so you need to check with Mr. Comp. - you're winning, but the game becomes mutually ugly. The effective refutation to the gambit is in the following: https://old.chesstempo.com/gamedb/game/5189635/ply/7 But nobody knows it except for Jobava. "Someone Just Played My Trap in the British Championship" to look at Youtube, against Caro Kann. Btw, against CK - if you think your opponent won't know the Botvinnik-Carls var (you Know what I talk about 'cause I said so), just do 'The Gotham': " CRUSH The Caro-Kann with WGM Nemo Zhou " in Youtube. Your opponent won't know what fell on him. "What? CK! - The most solid defense, how come?!" --- Now that you know I'm smug. er, smart, let's go to openings. Against e4: Sicilian Najdorf, and learn the sidelines. - Lord Stronghold - free, on chessable. If you want a Dragon, the best objectively is the Acc. Dragon. But I'd give a chance to the Chinese Dragon because you have an attack for sure - no pawns to block your rooks, and almost no one except Carlsen and GM Bryan Smith knows of its existence. happy sac.ing! There's also a Drago-dorf if you like the restraining a6 move. Against d4: I don't usually suggest doubious things to people, the best gambit-like opening to feat your style is the Budapest Gambit. Against London System, I believe Gotham and Agadmator, but top players play a KID setup - it screws both Londoner's bishops and easily prepare to pinch the pyramid at the top. As White... Well, since you're an aggressive player, I must suggest the Adhiban b3 course (chessable) - be a cowboy and Nimzo-Larsen your opponents! Adhiban is so cool, that he's cooler than Me. Fair is fair - he's the cooler person.

Gik-Tally

once upon a time, bobby fisher CLAIMED to have refuted the king's gambit, only his line performs badly at lower levels. it might be worst, but i can't see game results under 2000 because you can't filter ratings when you're logged in for some reason which makes zero sense. if anything, it should be a members only perk. i do know the strongest reply to king's gambit is the falkbeer counter-gambit!

log out, filter lichess players over 2000 out of your results and just look at how well gambits perform. gambit hate and blindly quoting grandmasters has got to stop!

my rating's settling down to high 1500s due to an 1870 start, and i beat an 1818 in just 14 moves with king's gambit and have lots of 1700 plus scalps gambiting. it even felt EASIER playing "passive" higher rated players than weird low rated kamikazes that trip me up positionally.

gambits are NOT unsound unless you're playing against players with flawless defense. in fact, i see very often that stockfish's choices perform the worst while lines down 2 pawns can have insane winning stats. the math isn't absolute.

people need to stop calling gambits unsound just because they are against grandmasters and computers! against HUMANS at under 2000, the most common gambits like king's, smith morra (my favorite ant-sicilian), french wing, and blackmar diemer actually PERFORM at around +8%. how is winning all those free points unsound? once upon a time, bobby fisher CLAIMED to have refuted the king's gambit, only his line performs badly at lower levels. it might be worst, but i can't see game results under 2000 because you can't filter ratings when you're logged in for some reason which makes zero sense. if anything, it should be a members only perk. i do know the strongest reply to king's gambit is the falkbeer counter-gambit! log out, filter lichess players over 2000 out of your results and just look at how well gambits perform. gambit hate and blindly quoting grandmasters has got to stop! my rating's settling down to high 1500s due to an 1870 start, and i beat an 1818 in just 14 moves with king's gambit and have lots of 1700 plus scalps gambiting. it even felt EASIER playing "passive" higher rated players than weird low rated kamikazes that trip me up positionally. gambits are NOT unsound unless you're playing against players with flawless defense. in fact, i see very often that stockfish's choices perform the worst while lines down 2 pawns can have insane winning stats. the math isn't absolute.

Nisko1234

Someone mentioned Halloween Gambit and Cochrane Gambit - I highly recommend them! Cochrane Gambit was played against Kramnik and game was drawn! Halloween Gambit - well, you're kinda Choking him - that's a way to win - most people don't defend That good for That long.

Nisko1234 edited

#10

@Gik-Tally said in #8:

people need to stop calling gambits unsound just because they are against grandmasters and computers!

A story for you and the rest.

I tried to play against Victoria - best bot in chess24 website. (I'm able to beat Chessmaster 2100 in a slow game using the Colle-Zukertort system), but Victoria knew to keep the position open and I lost a lot. so... I used Stockfish...
Stockfish (15!) only draw with Victoria...
I used the Nakhmanson Gambit... (With Stockfish)
Victoria is losing to it - forced to lose the queen, and mate on move 33 or so.

A Bot can't defend against the Nakhmanson! (15+15 time ctrl).

@Gik-Tally said in #8: > people need to stop calling gambits unsound just because they are against grandmasters and computers! A story for you and the rest. I tried to play against Victoria - best bot in chess24 website. (I'm able to beat Chessmaster 2100 in a slow game using the Colle-Zukertort system), but Victoria knew to keep the position open and I lost a lot. so... I used Stockfish... Stockfish (15!) only draw with Victoria... I used the Nakhmanson Gambit... (*With* Stockfish) Victoria is losing to it - forced to lose the queen, and mate on move 33 or so. A *Bot* can't defend against the Nakhmanson! (15+15 time ctrl).

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.