more fun with statistics

So when I last left you dear readers I was attempting a pseudo scientific method of coming up with a good repertoire for white.  I will be putting up more tables in  here but I just wanted to go over the criteria again.

• I looked at games between 2001 – 2010, that’s when my database ends. I never upgraded it, once again other things to spend my money on.
• I looked at desirable outcome differential for white based on 100 games, I assumed a desirable outcome would be white wins.  As an example if an opening has a decisive game percentage of 68% and white wins 54% of those games we get 100(.68)(.54) = 37.62 so white wins 37 (round up) out of 100 games.  Black would win 100(.68)(.46) = 31.28 or 31 games.  White is better by 6 games.  This was done to eliminate deceiving openings where white wins 56% of the games but only 52% of them are decisive, in that case white has an expectation of 6 or just about average.  On the surface it looks like white is doing much better but in reality its just an average opening.
• I separated games of those <2200 to those of professionals.  For arguments sake  I consider anyone over 2200 a professional although I realize that many GM’s have other non – chess full time jobs and I’m sure the vast majority of masters do as well.
• The reasoning for this is that as the skill level increases you get a clearer picture of how games “should” go with better skill and a lower probability of being fooled or tricked by an unusual opening.

Shortcomings of methodology

• Assuming a positive expectation for white only when s/he wins.  If I’m playing someone 200 points higher than me then a draw is a perfectly acceptable outcome even with white.  After all the opening is only one phase of the game, and it doesn’t matter how booked up I am my much higher rated opponent should win.
• 10 years is convenient but does not tell the whole story, there are variations which are out of fashion and simply not played much, there are undoubtedly good lines that are just being ignored right now, these will be under if not unrepresented in this survey.
• Transpositions, I didn’t have an unlimited amount of time for this so there are transpositions that I could not cover, so I’m keeping it as simple as possible, I have an example of this later on.
• The professional filter is used on both players, so I am not tracking where one player is rated >2200 and the other is <2200, this should not have a great affect on the data, but it bears mentioning.
• I’m sure there are others but that’s all I can think of now.

So I decided from my last post that 1.d4 is a better first move for white than 1.e4, interestingly Peter, a commenter on my Chess Advantage in Black and White post (which can be read here) mentioned that Larry Kaufman’s revised repertoire book is actually a complete rewrite, with the white repertoire based upon 1.d4 followed with 2.c4.  You can go here to get a sample of the book.  (Thanks to the nice folks at New In Chess.)  I am looking forward to reading this book.

I have already looked at some of the outcomes for symmetrical 1.d4 openings (ones where black plays an early d5 So now let’s look at the Indian defenses.

A few notes:

1. The KID was taken after the move sequence 1.d4, Nf6 2.c4, g6 3.Nc4, Bg7 4.e4, d6 5.Nf3, 0-0
2. The Nimzo arises after 1.d4, Nf6 2.c4, e6 3.Nc3, Bb4
3. The Queen’s Indian arises after 1.d4, Nf6 2.c4, e6 3.Nf3, b6
4. The Bogo Indian arises after 1.d4, Nf6 2.c4, e6 3.Nf3, Bb4+
5. The Modern Benoni is r 1.d4, Nf6 2.c4, c5 3.d5, e6.
6. The Czech Benoni is 1.d4, Nf6 2.c4, c5 3.d5, e5.
7. The Benko Gambit is 1.d4, Nf6 2.c4, c5 3.d5, b5.
8. The Dutch is simply 1.d4, f5, I included the Dutch because I know there has to be a fan or two of the opening that will read this, but this is really only scratching the surface of this versatile defense.  Black my attempt to open 1…d5 if s/he is aiming for a Stonewall or 1…d6 if attempting a Leningrad (although Black must be prepared for a Pirc or Modern if White answers with 2.e4), and then of course Black could throw out 1…e6 if s/he is aiming for a Classical Dutch. (Here Black has to be happy playing the French as 2. e4 puts the game into this opening.  This is also not considering that Black may get into a Leningrad/Stonewall Hybrid with pawns at d5, e6, f5 and g6 with the Bishop at g7.  So I took 1d4, f5 instead.
9. I understand that this doesn’t take into account all transpostional possibilities but I actually have a full time job too, so something has to give.

	Opening	Games	Decisive	White W	Black W	Delta
Total	King’s Indian	36,844	71	55.0%	45.0%	7.1
Professional	King’s Indian	13,508	62	57.0%	43.0%	8.7
Total	Nimzo	40,096	66	51.0%	49.0%	1.3
Professional	Nimzo	18,663	56	53.0%	47.0%	3.4
Total	Queen’s Indian	26,403	62	54.0%	46.0%	5.0
Professional	Queen’s Indian	13,943	54	55.0%	45.0%	5.4
Total	Bogo Indian	10,653	64	55.0%	45.0%	6.4
Professional	Bogo Indian	5,112	55	57.0%	43.0%	7.7
Total	Modern Benoni	7,888	77	52.0%	48.0%	3.1
Professional	Modern Benoni	2,476	69	57.0%	43.0%	9.7
Total	Czech Benoni	2,409	73	53.0%	47.0%	4.4
Professional	Czech Benoni	997	69	59.0%	41.0%	12.4
Total	Benko Gambit	14,757	74	52.0%	48.0%	3.0
Professional	Benko Gambit	4,317	67	57.0%	43.0%	9.4
Total	Dutch	28,090	73	54.0%	46.0%	5.8
Professional	Dutch	6,854	64	57.0%	43.0%	9.0
Total	Grunfeld	23,181	68	53.0%	47.0%	4.1
Professional	Grunfeld	8,627	56	55.0%	45.0%	5.6

So what does this mess of numbers tell us?  What I see is that the opportunity to move second and steer the game into waters that are more familiar to you than your opponent is very important at <2200 levels.  The Nimzo and Modern Benoni, and the Benko do very well down here for us normal folk.

So what is a non professional to do.  How about we flip the script as the kids used to say (granted a long time ago but I remember them saying it).  Lets look at system openings for White.

More notes first.

1. Colle vs. King’s Indian Defense (KID) is 1.d4, Nf6 2. Nf3, g6 3.e3, Bg7.
2.  Colle vs. Queen’s Indian Defense (QID) is 1.d4, Nf6 2. Nf3,e6 3.e3, b6.
3. Colle vs. Benoni is 1.d4, Nf6 2. Nf3, c5 3.d5, e6 4.Nc3.  This is the anti – Benoni from Summerscale’s A Killer Chess Opening Repertoire, published by Gambit.
4. Anti Dutch is 1.d4, f5 2.Bg5, again comes from Summerscale.
5. Anti Colle is 1.d4, d5 2.Nf3, Nf6 3.e3, c5.  There are other Anti Colle’s out there but this seems to be the most popular and leads to a reversed Noteboom variation of the Semi-Slav.  Palliser seems to think its a big challenge as well as Summerscale and Kaufman recommends it (at least he used to in The Chess Advantage in Black and White)

	Opening	Games	Decisive	White W	Black W	Delta
Total	Colle vs. KID	2,256	72	38.0%	62.0%	-17.3
Professional	Colle vs. KID	176	60	40.0%	60.0%	-12.0
Total	Colle vs. QID	3,870	67	49.0%	51.0%	-1.3
Professional	Colle vs. QID	1,331	59	51.0%	49.0%	1.2
Total	Colle vs. Benoni	482	67	59.0%	41.0%	12.1
Professional	Colle vs. Benoni	217	65	58.0%	52.0%	3.9
Total	Anti Dutch	2,264	75	58.0%	42.0%	12.0
Professional	Anti Dutch	489	69	60.0%	40.0%	13.8
Total	Anti Colle	1,646	70	43.0%	57.0%	-9.8
Professional	Anti Colle	379	63	43.0%	57.0%	-8.8

Well the Colle doesn’t fare well against the KID or the QID.  To be fair no Colle book that I know of thinks that its a good idea to continue in Colle fashion vs. the KID.  Against the QID Colle authors suggest an early c4 but the mainline QID scores well for Black and White is probably a little unfamiliar in these lines so that’ probably why the less than great 51% for White in these lines.  The Anti Benoni and Anti Dutch lines work well but the Anti Colle seems like a deal breaker.  And for those of you wondering about the Barry attack (1.d4, Nf6 2.Nf3, g6 3.Nc3, d5 4.Bf4, Bg7 5.e3) here it is.

	Opening	Games	Decisive	White W	Black W	Delta
Total	Barry	1,027	70	49.0%	51.0%	-1.4
Professional	Barry	364	63	52.0%	48.0%	2.5

Which leads us to the London.

1. London vs. KID 1.d4, Nf6 2.Nf3, g6 3. Bf4, Bg7 4. e3, 0-0
2. London vs. QID 1.d4, Nf6 2.Nf3, e6 3. Bf4, b6 4.e3, Bb7 5. Bd3.
3. London vs. Grunfeld (Gru) 1.d4, Nf6 2.Nf3, d5 3. Bf4, g6 4. e3, Bg7.

	Opening	Games	Decisive	White W	Black W	Delta
Total	London vs. KID	2,366	70	49.0%	51.0%	-1.4
Professional	London vs. KID	565	62	54.0%	46.0%	5.0
Total	London vs. QID	1,302	68	49.0%	51.0%	-1.4
Professional	London vs. QID	261	58	51.0%	49.0%	1.2
Total	London vs. Gru	773	68	55.0%	45.0%	6.8
Professional	London vs. Gru	98	58	49.0%	51.0%	-1.2

Better but the London is not much better than the Colle vs. the KID.

How about the other 1.d4 systems?  What if you tried to marry a Torre attack or Trompowsky to a Colle or London Repertoire?  I will even look at the Pseudo Trompowsky or the Hodgson (1.d4, d5 2. Bg5) system just for giggles.

1. Torre 1.d4, Nf6 2. Nf3, e6 3.Bg5
2. Torre 2: 1.d4, Nf6 2. Nf3, e6 3.Bg5, Ne4
3. Hodgson Attack 2: 2…f6

	Opening	Games	Decisive	White W	Black W	Delta
Total	Torre	7,646	68	51.0%	49.0%	1.4
Professional	Torre	2,067	58	49.0%	51.0%	-1.2
Total	Trompowsky	20,667	72	54.0%	46.0%	5.8
Professional	Trompowsky	6,820	64	53.0%	47.0%	3.8
Total	Hodgson Attack	4,315	71	59.0%	41.0%	12.8
Professional	Hodgson Attack	1,048	61	53.0%	47.0%	3.7
Total	Hodgson Attack 2	303	79	48.0%	52.0%	-3.2
Professional	Hodgson Attack 2	130	71	43.0%	57.0%	-9.9

The Trompowsky is a good alternative, and explains its popularity and it would go along nicely with a Colle or London Repertoire, however many London and Colle games begin with 1…Nf6 so you’d probably be playing a Trompowsky repertoire with Colle or London games thrown in and not the other way around.  The Torre doesn’t seem to have much bite to it.  I put the second move in for the Hodgson Attack 2 to show how truly awful results can be in a particular line after just one move.  This probably explains why you don’t see it more often other than as a surprise weapon.

Once again what to make of all of this mess?

The Torre has worked for great players over the years, Petrosian used it, and Julian Hodgson has used his namesake attack against strong opposition with good results.  Gata Kamsky even uses the London from time to time with good results.  The bottom line is most people are not going to be facing opposition that is as good as these gentlemen have faced.

Bottom line is, it’s late and after all of this number monkey business I still didn’t have a solution.  But my next post will let you in on how I made my final decision.

Have a good week folks.

	Opening	Games	Decisive	White W	Black W	Delta
Total	King’s Indian	36,844	71	55.0%	45.0%	7.1
Professional	King’s Indian	13,508	62	57.0%	43.0%	8.7
Total	Nimzo	40,096	66	51.0%	49.0%	1.3
Professional	Nimzo	18,663	56	53.0%	47.0%	3.4
Total	Queen’s Indian	26,403	62	54.0%	46.0%	5.0
Professional	Queen’s Indian	13,943	54	55.0%	45.0%	5.4
Total	Bogo Indian	10,653	64	55.0%	45.0%	6.4
Professional	Bogo Indian	5,112	55	57.0%	43.0%	7.7
Total	Modern Benoni	7,888	77	52.0%	48.0%	3.1
Professional	Modern Benoni	2,476	69	57.0%	43.0%	9.7
Total	Czech Benoni	2,409	73	53.0%	47.0%	4.4
Professional	Czech Benoni	997	69	59.0%	41.0%	12.4
Total	Benko Gambit	14,757	74	52.0%	48.0%	3.0
Professional	Benko Gambit	4,317	67	57.0%	43.0%	9.4
Total	Dutch	28,090	73	54.0%	46.0%	5.8
Professional	Dutch	6,854	64	57.0%	43.0%	9.0
Total	Grunfeld	23,181	68	53.0%	47.0%	4.1
Professional	Grunfeld	8,627	56	55.0%	45.0%	5.6