In a recent episode of the Perpetual Chess Podcast, Ben talked about how different openings perform at different levels: It had me looking at how different openings score. I probably I should be doing this anyway, but out of curiosity and not going deep into the variations: 1. e4 how do the different moves look, and then like sorting by every 200 point rating band […] and it's funny the double king pawn at the GM level it wins less, but draws more and overall black's expected value is higher, but Sicilians do still win more, but once you get to the club level, 1. e4 e5 is the worst opening, even though it's objectively the best, …
Great data Simon, thanks for pulling it together. One point I would highlight is that your own data with particular openings, IMO, should supersede the overall data, i.e. if you yourself do well with 1... e5 I wouldn't worry that other amateurs aren't. OTOH If your 1...e5 data is bad, it might be all the more reason to experiment with something else.
Great data Simon, thanks for pulling it together. One point I would highlight is that your own data with particular openings, IMO, should supersede the overall data, i.e. if you yourself do well with 1... e5 I wouldn't worry that other amateurs aren't. OTOH If your 1...e5 data is bad, it might be all the more reason to experiment with something else.
Very interesting article. I probably won’t switch openings because of it, but the data itself are very interesting.