In chess if you memorize variations without knowing the strategy behind the moves, you are aiming at nothing, hence you will hit your target every time.
So very true.
Well said!!
I now pretty much stick to as few openings as possible so I can at least try to grasp some kind of understanding of what I am playing. Against E4 I only play the french now and have done so for a good few months now and I think I understand the basic ideas and variations but still don't really have a clue whats going on really in the positions, although I have been doing well with it though. I know why I have to break with c5 and f6 and generally when to do so and why my c8 bishop can be a problem but studying the games of Korchnoi et al I see just how little I understand. But I think just playing one or two openings is the best way to go.
At my local club I have noticed when we play against school teams they tend to know loads of opening theory but if you just play one move that objectively is'nt the best move early on they tend to fall apart pretty quickly as they don't know why they are playing the moves they are, and why the objectively best moves are the objectively best moves.
I believe the saying is:
"Aim at nothing, and you'll hit it every time"
The struggle is to balance opening theory with your own strategy. Chess games can be considered a form of art. Strive to paint a masterpiece by coming up with your own ideas and variants (side variations) in the openings and defenses you play. This can be accomplished by playing sound moves in the opening that deviate from the main variation. Chess has not been exhausted, nor has opening theory. Deviating from main opening lines at the championship level would allow for a quick draw or obtaining an unfavorable position, but at the club level, a slight departure from the main line may force your opponent to play chess and abandone any memorized variations. It will also test your opponent's resolve and understanding of the opening. Illustrating this theme, can be done by the following deviation from main line opening theory: 1.d4 Nc6 2.c4 e5!? 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.dxe5 Ne4 with a Budapest setup reached by transposition. My game went continued 5.Bf4 Bc5 6.Nbd2?? Bxf2 ##. My opponent obviously frustrated that I didn't follow any lines he had memorized, failed
I have recently had a long hard look at my previous games to see how many of them were won or lost purely through the opening. Since I have been quite theory obsessed I assumed that the games I won were because of this. However I could'nt find a single game where I won purely because of my opening play (except against very low rated players). They were always won or lost due to later blunders or poor endgame technique. I think we also try to copy our heros too much without understanding them. Here is an interesting thing that Jonathan Rowson said on the subject of openings in his book "Chess for zebras" :
"The main reason openings matter so much more at the elite level is that during the game the margin for error is so much smaller, and the level of concentration and technique is so much higher. This means if you get a serious advantage out of the opening there is a very real chance you will win the game. Moreover, if you get nothing out of the opening it is much harder to outplay your opponent because they normally know how to play chess rather well! You are not likely to win because your opponent exchanges the wrong pieces, or needlessly exposes his king, or blunders a pawn."
Also he once asked Tony Miles after a game if he felt he could get a reasonable advantage out of the opening (He had played an unusual Tromposky) and Miles replied that he wanted an unbalanced position that he was comfortable with, and then try to outplay him between moves 25-40.
After hearing all this I decided to experiment more in the openings. Against e4 e5 I have always tried things like the Kings gambit or Ruy Lopez etc and tryed to remember more of the theory than my opponent. Even when I have it is usually only a very small advantage. I have recently started playing the Center Game (e4 e5 d4) and have a 100% win success rate! There is very little theory on it and it is very easy to start experimenting and just attacking blacks king. All my wins so far have been before move 40 and one was checkmate in 24 moves! I have found it clear to see that although players tend to know the moves they don't really have any opening understanding. For example one player rated around 1750 (so you would assume they would know how to open a game reasonably) replyed e4 e5 d4 Bd6?? with an extremely easy advantage for white which is far more than you would expect out of a more well known opening. The opening just gives you a basic position, but one where it is very easy to start an attack and start sacrificing pawns and pieces to mate the king! I have just started a game with it against someone rated around 2100 and have a reasonable game so far.
I also now believe it is more important to remember general principles and sayings rather than opening variations. For example "loose pieces get taken" has helped me alot. When you start making a plan you just see which of your opponents pieces and pawns are not protected (and the same for your own) and try to think of how you could either attack two of them at once or attack one and threaten something else at the same time. Just the other day I was playing in a final at my club and reached what my higher graded opponent had thought was an easily drawn position. However earlier in the game i had noticed that he had an awquardly placed pawn that could only realistically be defended by a pawn to b6, but his only counter play was b5 and when he played it I attacked his c5, won it and with it the game.
So anyway I definitely think we should all experiment more in the openings, rather than being elitest and saying "well fritz says thats really bad" or "Anand dos'nt play that anymore so I don't either" and just play chess. And if you really must keep copying GMs, make it Morosevich as he experiments alot early in the game.
This sounds vaguely similar to one of my favorite Hitchhikers Guide quotes.
" There is an art, it says, or rather, a knack to flying.
Most people fail to miss the ground, and if they are really trying properly, the likelihood is that they will fail to miss it fairly hard."
TheChessGym wrote: In chess if you memorize variations without knowing the strategy behind the moves, you are aiming at nothing, hence you will hit your target every time.
It's exactly why you get so many opponents following book, opening databases and so on, then fall apart after move 8-12 or even through 15. So they've played a perfect opening but then hit the wall....what to do now? Chess is more than stats or patterns, or even numerical calculations. If the founding principles of why you make the opening moves you do are not understood, no photogenic memory is going to help you win games against the player who knows the why behind the patterns and because of that can set up knock-out combinations.
Join Chess.com for free to add your comment! Already a member? Then login now to comment.