I started my new openings repertoire a year ago at the club after a 5 year break. I played in a group under 1700 and scored 9 out of 12 with it. This year I'm promoted to the group rated higher than 1700.
I only knew the first three moves of each opening.
- The London System 1.d4 ... 2.Bf4 ... 3.e3 ...
- The Sniper 1. ... c5 2. ... g6 3. ... Bg7
- The HAD 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 g6 3.d4 cxd4
The reason I scored well: I was the highest rated player in the group. Usually I score terribly against lower rated players though. I keep dropping half points due to time trouble. But since I'm no longer looking for the ultimate tactical shot every move, the time trouble is basically over. I look for ways to bolster the center, and give the opponent the chance to go astray. Which he usually does.
This year I will be playing against higher rated players, so I will have to adapt a bit. I'm changing the move order here and there.
I play the London Jobava system, which is a bit more aggressive than the usual London 1. d4 ... 2.Nc3 ... 3 Bf4 ...
The Sniper will be played with 1. ... g6 2. ... Bg7 3. ... c5, which is the advised move order.
The HAD is the preferred opening when white plays 1.e4, in stead of the Pterodactyl variation of the Sniper.
The Dzindzi Indian, aka the beefeaters defense, is totally new to me 1. d4 g6 2. c4 Bg7 3. Nc3 c5 4. d5 Bxc3+ 5. bxc3 f5
I use Chessable to book up a bit. After a month or three I should be ready to know the ideas behind the openings well enough to be able to play it against higher rated players with confidence.
I want to connect the openings I play with the middlegame ideas of Nimzowitch and Smirnov. Meaning that my openings will adapt to my understanding of their works. Right know, I focus on understanding the center and the ways of fighting for it.
Since I'm no longer throwing the kitchen sink at move two to my opponent, my games become longer. Meaning that there will become a moment, that I will have to learn some endgame strategy. Aox provided me with the right material to do that.
The general idea behind the black openings is to create unbalanced positions from the get go. Usually black gets a good pawn structure at the cost of some space disadvantage. White is invited to overstretch himself in an all out attack. Black has usually ways to blow the center open by a freeing move and start a counter attack. An extra weapon is the trading of pieces. When the white attack peters out due to trading of too much pieces, black wants to be left with the better endgame position, in which he has invested.
I have to learn a lot. Like how to play the Maroczy Bind with black, for instance. But I think this way of playing suits my temperament well.
As you can see, I procrastinate the execution of the PoPLoAFun method with transfer by analogy with myself as guinea pig a bit. The main reason for that, is that the joy in chess is back, and there is a lot to learn. Finally I will be able to apply my usual logic reasoning to chess. But no worries, the tactical training will come in the not too distant future!