Body: <p>I've started to pick chess back up after a few years where I wasn't playing. (~1750 rating)  I can't figure out what to play as black against either d4 or e4</p>
  <p>For a long time, I've been very happy with playing an English-Botvinnik setup as white.  I like the type of positions I get, I like focusing on the pawn breaks, the fianchettos, the manuvering, and often having attacking chances, but also just being able to play against some sort of pawn or structural weakness.</p>
  <p>Originally, I played the KID and the Pirc, which seems like it makes sense, but I felt like I was too often on the defensive with the KID, and felt more cramped in general.  Also, I really hated the exchange lines.  The Pirc I felt had similar issues.</p>
  <p>I tried to pick up the Sicilian Dragon to play something a little more dynamic. I kind of like when I actually get to play it, even if it isn't really that focused on the pawn breaks, but I feel like the overwhelming majority of the time, opponents at my level will play some sort of sideline.</p>
  <p>Recently, I've tried to pick up the Leningrad Dutch.  It seems like it checks a lot of the boxes that I'm looking for,  I like that  it's less cramped, can be a bit aggressive, has a fianchetto, and plays for pawn breaks.  The only thing I'm not a huge fan of, is that depending on what the opponent plays, sometimes it's better to just transpose into a Classical Dutch or Stonewall.  There seems like a lot of theory to learn here.</p>
  <p>Other things I've vaguely considered include:
  Nimzo/QID: Lots of theory, more open positions(?), don't like giving away the bishop pair, feels like my queenside pieces don't have good homes from the few games I've tried, but maybe that's just because I don't know what I'm doing.</p>
  <p>Alekhine's: Looks like all the bad Pirc positions where I messed up and let my opponent push the pawns too much.</p>
  <p>Grunfeld/Benoni/Benko stuff: I don't know much about these, maybe there's something here I would like?</p>
  <p>I think that's basically everything that sort of fits what I'd like to do, so I'm definitely open to revisiting something here, or being pointed in the direction of something else that I'm not anticipating as an answer.  I know the usual advice is play something outside of your comfort zone to improve your chess in general, but honestly, I'm not trying to become a titled player or anything, I just want something I can consistently play and enjoy because it gives me the types of positions I find most interesting and comfortable.</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2020-11-25T17:45:41.773Z
Comments.Text: I'm afraid that's far too vague and general to be an acceptable question here. It solicits discussion type answers. Please edit it to make it more specific or else the question will be closed. To help you please also visit the Help Center to see what type of questions are encouraged (https://chess.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic) and which are discouraged (https://chess.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask).
Comments.UserDisplayName: Brian Towers
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2020-11-26T11:53:10.460Z
Comments.Text: perhaps take the things you don't like as a challenge. I don't like playing without space but I will learn to play without space. I don't like giving up my bishop pair but I will understand what my compensation is for it. I don't like sicilian sidelines but I will figure out how to play against them. I don't like playing defensively but I will learn how to do it. After overcoming these challenges, perhaps you'll realize that you like many more positions as you are able to play them well.
Comments.UserDisplayName: CognisMantis
Tags: <opening><1.e4><1.d4><defense>
Title: I cannot for the life of me settle on some openings for black
ThreadText: # I cannot for the life of me settle on some openings for black
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2020-11-25)
  
  I've started to pick chess back up after a few years where I wasn't playing. (~1750 rating) I can't figure out what to play as black against either d4 or e4
  
  For a long time, I've been very happy with playing an English-Botvinnik setup as white. I like the type of positions I get, I like focusing on the pawn breaks, the fianchettos, the manuvering, and often having attacking chances, but also just being able to play against some sort of pawn or structural weakness.
  
  Originally, I played the KID and the Pirc, which seems like it makes sense, but I felt like I was too often on the defensive with the KID, and felt more cramped in general. Also, I really hated the exchange lines. The Pirc I felt had similar issues.
  
  I tried to pick up the Sicilian Dragon to play something a little more dynamic. I kind of like when I actually get to play it, even if it isn't really that focused on the pawn breaks, but I feel like the overwhelming majority of the time, opponents at my level will play some sort of sideline.
  
  Recently, I've tried to pick up the Leningrad Dutch. It seems like it checks a lot of the boxes that I'm looking for, I like that it's less cramped, can be a bit aggressive, has a fianchetto, and plays for pawn breaks. The only thing I'm not a huge fan of, is that depending on what the opponent plays, sometimes it's better to just transpose into a Classical Dutch or Stonewall. There seems like a lot of theory to learn here.
  
  Other things I've vaguely considered include:
  Nimzo/QID: Lots of theory, more open positions(?), don't like giving away the bishop pair, feels like my queenside pieces don't have good homes from the few games I've tried, but maybe that's just because I don't know what I'm doing.
  
  Alekhine's: Looks like all the bad Pirc positions where I messed up and let my opponent push the pawns too much.
  
  Grunfeld/Benoni/Benko stuff: I don't know much about these, maybe there's something here I would like?
  
  I think that's basically everything that sort of fits what I'd like to do, so I'm definitely open to revisiting something here, or being pointed in the direction of something else that I'm not anticipating as an answer. I know the usual advice is play something outside of your comfort zone to improve your chess in general, but honestly, I'm not trying to become a titled player or anything, I just want something I can consistently play and enjoy because it gives me the types of positions I find most interesting and comfortable.
  
  **Tags:** opening, 1.e4, 1.d4, defense
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: I'm afraid that's far too vague and general to be an acceptable question here. It solicits discussion type answers. Please edit it to make it more specific or else the question will be closed. To help you please also visit the Help Center to see what type of questions are encouraged (https://chess.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic) and which are discouraged (https://chess.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask).  
  > **username_2**: perhaps take the things you don't like as a challenge. I don't like playing without space but I will learn to play without space. I don't like giving up my bishop pair but I will understand what my compensation is for it. I don't like sicilian sidelines but I will figure out how to play against them. I don't like playing defensively but I will learn how to do it. After overcoming these challenges, perhaps you'll realize that you like many more positions as you are able to play them well.  
  
  ---
  
  ## 0 answers
  
  