Oooooo that's a genius idea. Off the top of my head, myth: KID has to be a checkmate-only opening, myth: strategic masterpieces have no tactics, rook endgames are impossible to master, etc. Lots of myths to bust or confirm!
I'm a club player (london, ahem...) and I played it for years because I thought I was doing myself a favor by avoiding opening theory. Your focus on development and plans has changed my entire view of the game. Diving into opening theory is def hard work, but is already making my games SO much more enjoyable! Thank you for all your hard work!
A great topic. I’ve been playing more d4 lately. Been a e4 player since 93. (Except for occasional junk like Veresov, Blackmar Diemer, and Torre Attack. This year I’m playing my old Catalan system. I have some holes in my d4 repertoire. I took a chance and bought Moskalenko’s d4 repertoire book to help fill some holes. Damn, Moskalenko’s repertoire is aggressive. I can’t use much of it because it just doesn’t fit into what I want to do but damn it’s aggressive. Book didn’t help my needs much but it looks like fun stuff. Mostly using Chessbase to fill my hole. The mainlines of my system in the open Catalan are really tactical with a bunch of tricks. Thanks again Andras- cebchess.
An important nuance here is how people define "aggressive" openings. As a budding intermediate, I used to associate "aggressive" with an early attack (often some early mate threat). I think this is a common belief among that cohort. But as I mature, I realize that many openings set a strong foundation for a middle or late-middle game attack. It's sort of a natural progression for many players. I also like to avoid labeling myself "aggressive" vs "positional". I think the deep truth of chess is that the position itself will dictate what needs to happen: attack, improve, or defend. At the end of the day, your opponent plays half the moves, too, so we don't often get to decide how "exciting" the game will become. Nevertheless, attacking players will choose openings in which it's statistically more likely. But as their opponents improve, that choice may change. A perfect example is the Knight Attack in the Italian, which beginners play for a quick attack and masters play for the nuanced positional imbalance.
I cannot agree with you more. The other two flaws in that myth are that most people just have an idea that they are/would like to be attacking but never properly examined whether they are more positional or attacking players. And second, that even if you are positional you need to practice attacking to get better
I've always preferred plenty of space around me (not just in chess 😃) and I enjoy a fast-moving game where the battles happen sooner. I'm so glad the first opening I ever learned was based on e4!
Btw loved the sub battle and you should definitely do it again. Overall an amazing stream and I have no regrets for staying up till 5 am to watch Midas127 crush the last board.
I think the English pronunciation of repertoire is like "repper twar" and your pronunciation is more like "rep pair twar" which might be correct for French speakers but is slightly odd sounding in English so that's probably what people are remarking on :)
Very nice video. I'd always expected that this "d4 positional, e4 tactical" idea was pretty shallow but I've never actually heard any titled player confirm that thought until now.
Botvinnik Semi-Slav is nuts. It was always on the edge of soundness. Shirov played some incredible games with the black side. Ivanchuk also. I’m not smart enough to play the black side. Huge imbalances.
@@TheBigGuppy the fact that it's on the razor's edge of soundness makes it really bizarre to play for both colors. it's the epitome of a deep dark forest where 2+2=5 and the road out is only wide enough for one
@@stanleytime9193 I've gone full circle with my semi-slav, starting with e3, deciding it was terribly boring, switching to Bg5, and crawling back to e3 after many sound beatings. Bg5 is Najdorf-like; you're either learning an intensive theory-tree or charging into no-man's-land with a bayonet and a prayer.
It's indeed a wild ride of an opening but, if you have nerves of steel, it is one of the most fun and rewarding openings to play. You can learn so much from it. But the theory, whew
I was waiting for you to mention the Botvinnik and was beginning to lose hope but you finally did! One of the most complex and double-edged openings, period, and one of the most fun as either side. I know I'm late seeing this, but I just found out about your channel a few weeks ago and I've been diving through them steadily. Wonderful work, Andras! Please keep going.
I like the classification that e4 is (often) about piece play and d4 is (often) about pawn play. Although the Sicilian also has a bunch of pawn play :)
Paul van der Sterren wrote FCO Fundamental Chess Openings, which brought home to me another difference between 1. e4 and 1. d4. That is, there is a 1. d4 / 1. c4 / 1. Nf3 mirror maze, where every move you should consider carefully what you gain and what you give up, in terms of possibly transposing into different openings or variations, or branching off. While in 1. e4 yes there can still be some transposition tricks, especially in the Ruy Lopez, but there is no mirror maze. You get 1...c5 or 1...c6 or 1...e6 or 1...Nf6 etc., and off you go into completely different openings without a backward glance.
with D4 white has a much easier time steering it into the game he wants compared to black who just has to hold on. For example, the london is nearly impossible to avoid if white wants it that badly, and its typically extremely quiet.
What's your opinion on the Catalan? It seems like it could go either way here depending on whether the c4 pawn is accepted. Would you reccomend it to students?
One thing I think that doesn't get mentioned is how much more theory intensive E4 is. I'm around a 1500 casual player. I know far more E4 theory, but still seem to be stronger playing D4 even though I'm almost always out of theory by move 3.
Just since you asked: the only issue with how you pronounce "repertoire" is which syllable you emphasize: you should emphasize the first syllable only (REP-er-toire), whereas you emphasize the second syllable (rep-ER-toire). That being said, everybody understands perfectly, so don't sweat it. Love the content! Thanks!
I'm not sure if anyone answered you on "repertoire", or you cared, but it's that you were putting the accent on the "er" instead of the "oire", the "er" is usually short/quick. It's basically a steady rhythm when saying the word, "ta-ta-ta", "repertoire", and you can have fun with the end of it if you like. That's how I always interpreted it anyway. *Not a French speaker
Of course it's wrong to make totally generalizing assumptions. But it can be benefitial not for deciding on your own repertoire but understanding your opponents style to have an idea based on which d4 or e4 systems they choose as a window to what -they- think is their main strength (and therefore weakness). They are not one in place of the other... (Example; playing KID/Modern showcases endgame confidence in one's self as players like Nakamura are happy to use the sharp middle games not to win but to suddenly reach a surprisingly solid endgame after White sacrifices for an attack that eventually leads to just an equal position and no more)... e5 showcases good confidence in memorization and vast knowledge of themes in a variaty of early middle games.. So in that sense it is Black who decides the nature of the game more in many ways, and White reveals what -he- believes is his strength between moves 2-5 normally. This definitely helped me look at it in a deeper way though. I've faced very tactically aggressive d4 players (Jobava London and others) and you just need to adjust on time..
Excellently explained, thanks Andras! I’m interested about ur thoughts on the “anti-grunfeld” (d4 Nf6 c4 g6 3.f3). Do you think it’s a good idea to play lines like this which discourage black from playing the grunfeld? (often transposes to a samisch) but even if they choose to play 3. ...d5, black lands themselves in a not-really-exchange position, where white gets in e4 but black can’t trade the knights and black is more likely to be out of their theory.
It used to be too popular for black not to know it well enough. It only makes sense if you are a saemisch player vs the kid anyway. Overall, not a fan.
@@ChessCoachAndras I could probably get away with using it comfortably now (at 1600-1700 chess.com) especially because very few ppl play the grunfeld at this level and so far I’ve always faced a transposition back to a saemisch, but I take your point, and will in the future start learning a variation against the grunfeld.
i wouldn't try to avoid the grünfeld as white it's one of the most beautiful openings for both black and white and there are so many good variations for positional or more tactical players most people will not even know how to play the russian variation
I don't believe Andras has great love for the Caro Kahn but there is a lot of chess coach out there who would recommend you to it. You must understand though that you have a light square bishop problem and solving it must be your top 1 strategic priority (for instance in most qgd lines, it is possible to solve it but that requires some theoretical knowledge. Don't know if it is the same for the Caro Kahn)
@@felbas4224 the French has the worst light square bishop problem. You actually develop the light square bishop most of the time with the Caro, especially in the Advanced and Classical Variation.
I am an old player and I feel like many grandmasters who played 1.e4 when young switched to 1.d4 in their older years. Can it be said, that 1. d4 in general is somewhat better for an old player than 1.e4? And if this is so, which are the main reasons? Or is 1.c4 even better for an old player?
World champion Alexander Alekhine was one of the greatest attacking players of all time, and goes always for d4 and matting attacks. So... Rudolph Spielmann change later in his career to d4 just to find he can create greater attack with this first move...
I used to play 'boring' 1.e4 openings (Four Knights, Alapin etc). Inspired your rants about mainlines are more fighting for the centah I now play the Shankland 1.d4 repertoire and I'm having way more fun.
Your content is “top notch.” Your videos always make me go “Wow,” this is such “high level” “legendary” stuff. As appreciation for your content, I purchased all your courses on Chessable, and haven’t been disappointed. The new thumbnails should help getting new subscriber’s. Thank you, for all you do!
Great stuff as usual! Could you discuss d4 systems like the Colle/Trompowsky or Torre Attack in a future video? I often struggle against these openings as black especially in blitz. I am always unprepared against these systems and white just puts a knight on e5 and attacks. Even though it's not the most challenging way to play in theory these openings seem to be hard to crack.
Interesting. English places the accent on the second syllable of repertoire instead of the first. Of course as long as your understood your communicating so no problems there.
I haven't even watched yet, but my gut reaction is that anyone who thinks e4 isn't positional hasn't played a slow italian game.
I hope this becomes a series because I suspect there are alot of chess myths.
Oooooo that's a genius idea. Off the top of my head, myth: KID has to be a checkmate-only opening, myth: strategic masterpieces have no tactics, rook endgames are impossible to master, etc. Lots of myths to bust or confirm!
@@michaelf8221 Another myth: White had an opening advantage
@@chessforfunonly1586now that one, I mean just look at the engines, you have 0.3 on move 1, also because white moves first so it makes sense.
Every time I join an andras toth video :
My mind : Hello to the chicos and the chicas
I'm a club player (london, ahem...) and I played it for years because I thought I was doing myself a favor by avoiding opening theory. Your focus on development and plans has changed my entire view of the game. Diving into opening theory is def hard work, but is already making my games SO much more enjoyable! Thank you for all your hard work!
A great topic. I’ve been playing more d4 lately. Been a e4 player since 93. (Except for occasional junk like Veresov, Blackmar Diemer, and Torre Attack. This year I’m playing my old Catalan system. I have some holes in my d4 repertoire. I took a chance and bought Moskalenko’s d4 repertoire book to help fill some holes. Damn, Moskalenko’s repertoire is aggressive. I can’t use much of it because it just doesn’t fit into what I want to do but damn it’s aggressive. Book didn’t help my needs much but it looks like fun stuff. Mostly using Chessbase to fill my hole. The mainlines of my system in the open Catalan are really tactical with a bunch of tricks. Thanks again Andras- cebchess.
justice for andras' burping child
A cracking topic. I’ve been curious about this for years.
An important nuance here is how people define "aggressive" openings. As a budding intermediate, I used to associate "aggressive" with an early attack (often some early mate threat). I think this is a common belief among that cohort. But as I mature, I realize that many openings set a strong foundation for a middle or late-middle game attack. It's sort of a natural progression for many players. I also like to avoid labeling myself "aggressive" vs "positional". I think the deep truth of chess is that the position itself will dictate what needs to happen: attack, improve, or defend. At the end of the day, your opponent plays half the moves, too, so we don't often get to decide how "exciting" the game will become. Nevertheless, attacking players will choose openings in which it's statistically more likely. But as their opponents improve, that choice may change. A perfect example is the Knight Attack in the Italian, which beginners play for a quick attack and masters play for the nuanced positional imbalance.
You're an amazing instructor, thank you for sharing your wisdom. :)
Thanks Dragisa, appreciate it!
Amazing vid! I've been perpetuating this myth for a long time, and now my eyes have been opened 😁
As an aside, you say repertoire just fine lol
I cannot agree with you more. The other two flaws in that myth are that most people just have an idea that they are/would like to be attacking but never properly examined whether they are more positional or attacking players. And second, that even if you are positional you need to practice attacking to get better
Andras assuming I don't lose in 10 moves regardless of the opening.
Andras, I really like ur chess attitude!
I've always preferred plenty of space around me (not just in chess 😃) and I enjoy a fast-moving game where the battles happen sooner. I'm so glad the first opening I ever learned was based on e4!
Btw loved the sub battle and you should definitely do it again. Overall an amazing stream and I have no regrets for staying up till 5 am to watch Midas127 crush the last board.
I think the English pronunciation of repertoire is like "repper twar" and your pronunciation is more like "rep pair twar" which might be correct for French speakers but is slightly odd sounding in English so that's probably what people are remarking on :)
Thanks man, this is what I expected
@@ChessCoachAndras Nabbot late to the party lolz
What's weird for me is the stress on the second syllable. In English the stress is more on the first syllable and in French it's more on the third.
No matter these pronunciations, the word (and more importantly the meaning) is understood. This should be all that matters.
@@ChessCoachAndras more like ruhpertoire
Very nice video. I'd always expected that this "d4 positional, e4 tactical" idea was pretty shallow but I've never actually heard any titled player confirm that thought until now.
d4 player: i play d4 because its more positional
me: *shows them the botvinnik semi slav*
former d4 player now e4 player: i'm never playing d4 again
Botvinnik Semi-Slav is nuts. It was always on the edge of soundness. Shirov played some incredible games with the black side. Ivanchuk also. I’m not smart enough to play the black side. Huge imbalances.
@@TheBigGuppy the fact that it's on the razor's edge of soundness makes it really bizarre to play for both colors. it's the epitome of a deep dark forest where 2+2=5 and the road out is only wide enough for one
Play e3 lol
@@stanleytime9193 I've gone full circle with my semi-slav, starting with e3, deciding it was terribly boring, switching to Bg5, and crawling back to e3 after many sound beatings. Bg5 is Najdorf-like; you're either learning an intensive theory-tree or charging into no-man's-land with a bayonet and a prayer.
It's indeed a wild ride of an opening but, if you have nerves of steel, it is one of the most fun and rewarding openings to play. You can learn so much from it. But the theory, whew
I was waiting for you to mention the Botvinnik and was beginning to lose hope but you finally did! One of the most complex and double-edged openings, period, and one of the most fun as either side. I know I'm late seeing this, but I just found out about your channel a few weeks ago and I've been diving through them steadily. Wonderful work, Andras! Please keep going.
I like the classification that e4 is (often) about piece play and d4 is (often) about pawn play. Although the Sicilian also has a bunch of pawn play :)
Paul van der Sterren wrote FCO Fundamental Chess Openings, which brought home to me another difference between 1. e4 and 1. d4. That is, there is a 1. d4 / 1. c4 / 1. Nf3 mirror maze, where every move you should consider carefully what you gain and what you give up, in terms of possibly transposing into different openings or variations, or branching off. While in 1. e4 yes there can still be some transposition tricks, especially in the Ruy Lopez, but there is no mirror maze. You get 1...c5 or 1...c6 or 1...e6 or 1...Nf6 etc., and off you go into completely different openings without a backward glance.
So very true. I'm learning this more as I mature as a player.
I am very thankful for this chess coach, he is the best!
2:12 "Because both moves- speaking is hard. Boeth meuves..." 😂😂
Watching you mate is like watch a documentary. And I Love It! Thank you
Hi! Appreciate the video. Have you thought about making something akin to an opening tier list? :) Or advantages and disadvantages or openings?
with D4 white has a much easier time steering it into the game he wants compared to black who just has to hold on. For example, the london is nearly impossible to avoid if white wants it that badly, and its typically extremely quiet.
What's your opinion on the Catalan? It seems like it could go either way here depending on whether the c4 pawn is accepted. Would you reccomend it to students?
Its a great opening and yes, I would!
Famously, Korchnoi described Karpov: "He is like a fish!". Bro actually described Stockfish.
You said repertoire just fine. Gotta say I love your cockney accented English, don't change anything.
One thing I think that doesn't get mentioned is how much more theory intensive E4 is. I'm around a 1500 casual player. I know far more E4 theory, but still seem to be stronger playing D4 even though I'm almost always out of theory by move 3.
Just since you asked: the only issue with how you pronounce "repertoire" is which syllable you emphasize: you should emphasize the first syllable only (REP-er-toire), whereas you emphasize the second syllable (rep-ER-toire). That being said, everybody understands perfectly, so don't sweat it. Love the content! Thanks!
Subscribed because of this video! Thanks for the great content!
I'm not sure if anyone answered you on "repertoire", or you cared, but it's that you were putting the accent on the "er" instead of the "oire", the "er" is usually short/quick.
It's basically a steady rhythm when saying the word, "ta-ta-ta", "repertoire", and you can have fun with the end of it if you like. That's how I always interpreted it anyway.
*Not a French speaker
Of course it's wrong to make totally generalizing assumptions. But it can be benefitial not for deciding on your own repertoire but understanding your opponents style to have an idea based on which d4 or e4 systems they choose as a window to what -they- think is their main strength (and therefore weakness). They are not one in place of the other... (Example; playing KID/Modern showcases endgame confidence in one's self as players like Nakamura are happy to use the sharp middle games not to win but to suddenly reach a surprisingly solid endgame after White sacrifices for an attack that eventually leads to just an equal position and no more)... e5 showcases good confidence in memorization and vast knowledge of themes in a variaty of early middle games..
So in that sense it is Black who decides the nature of the game more in many ways, and White reveals what -he- believes is his strength between moves 2-5 normally.
This definitely helped me look at it in a deeper way though. I've faced very tactically aggressive d4 players (Jobava London and others) and you just need to adjust on time..
Excellently explained, thanks Andras! I’m interested about ur thoughts on the “anti-grunfeld” (d4 Nf6 c4 g6 3.f3). Do you think it’s a good idea to play lines like this which discourage black from playing the grunfeld? (often transposes to a samisch) but even if they choose to play 3. ...d5, black lands themselves in a not-really-exchange position, where white gets in e4 but black can’t trade the knights and black is more likely to be out of their theory.
It used to be too popular for black not to know it well enough. It only makes sense if you are a saemisch player vs the kid anyway. Overall, not a fan.
@@ChessCoachAndras I could probably get away with using it comfortably now (at 1600-1700 chess.com) especially because very few ppl play the grunfeld at this level and so far I’ve always faced a transposition back to a saemisch, but I take your point, and will in the future start learning a variation against the grunfeld.
i wouldn't try to avoid the grünfeld as white
it's one of the most beautiful openings for both black and white and there are so many good variations for positional or more tactical players
most people will not even know how to play the russian variation
Nowadays it's known as f3 grunfeld as part of the mainlines, a devoted grunfeld player would probably just play d5 anyway.
Would you recommend caro cann for a 1400 player??
Not really but it’s not a bad choice
I don't believe Andras has great love for the Caro Kahn but there is a lot of chess coach out there who would recommend you to it. You must understand though that you have a light square bishop problem and solving it must be your top 1 strategic priority (for instance in most qgd lines, it is possible to solve it but that requires some theoretical knowledge. Don't know if it is the same for the Caro Kahn)
@@felbas4224 the French has the worst light square bishop problem. You actually develop the light square bishop most of the time with the Caro, especially in the Advanced and Classical Variation.
I am an old player and I feel like many grandmasters who played 1.e4 when young switched to 1.d4 in their older years. Can it be said, that 1. d4 in general is somewhat better for an old player than 1.e4? And if this is so, which are the main reasons? Or is 1.c4 even better for an old player?
Why didn’t the black queen go to c7 @ 9:41 ?
I'm also proud of that burp!
another amazing video !
As a Midwesterner repertoire sounds normal to me, with perhaps a bit of a space/pause in the middle that I'm not used to 😂
World champion Alexander Alekhine was one of the greatest attacking players of all time, and goes always for d4 and matting attacks. So... Rudolph Spielmann change later in his career to d4 just to find he can create greater attack with this first move...
I used to play 'boring' 1.e4 openings (Four Knights, Alapin etc). Inspired your rants about mainlines are more fighting for the centah I now play the Shankland 1.d4 repertoire and I'm having way more fun.
Your content is “top notch.” Your videos always make me go “Wow,” this is such “high level” “legendary” stuff.
As appreciation for your content, I purchased all your courses on Chessable, and haven’t been disappointed.
The new thumbnails should help getting new subscriber’s. Thank you, for all you do!
I think you must have the strongest Aussie accent of any Hungarian in history :) Great video BTW.
Would be interested to see attacking d4 setups for white....a future video perhaps????
Great stuff as usual! Could you discuss d4 systems like the Colle/Trompowsky or Torre Attack in a future video? I often struggle against these openings as black especially in blitz. I am always unprepared against these systems and white just puts a knight on e5 and attacks. Even though it's not the most challenging way to play in theory these openings seem to be hard to crack.
A series about busting system openings would be in the spirit of this channel
is coach going to vegas?
I am trying to get Endgame Virtuoso for a while but is not available and hard to find
Love the video!
Damn I realised I missed you had a king safety course on chessable. You promoted it on this channel o_O ?
Not yet
Stylistically I think those who enjoy a space advantage will prefer 1. d4 to 1. e4
Andras Toth.......... world class tutelage for free on RUclips, he is next level good. Super like.
Potato patato tomato tomato repertoire reppetwar let’s call the whole thing off.... e4 e5 d4 d5.... let’s call the whole thing off.... 💪🏼👏
Well 1.e4 allows for this
1. e4 e5
2. f4
It being the most based opening in existance so. e4 all the way
i'm french and the way you say repertoire is pretty good (it isn't perfect french, but way better than most american pronunciations ^^)
Something tells me we don’t say it the same way because it’s literally been made an English word, much like bourgeoise and Kindergarten
repertoire is pronounced as "re puh twaar" I think
Interesting. English places the accent on the second syllable of repertoire instead of the first. Of course as long as your understood your communicating so no problems there.
0:52 reppah-twah
Alphazero - I attack but I hate e4
Thumbnail hahahahahahahahahahaha
Phunkyt at it again💪💪
Repair twa----------------re pe twar
RE-per-toire vs re-PER-toire !
Re - puh - twaar
I say it more like re - per - twaar, emphasis on the re.