opening

In response to your text in Red.

He made an assumption I was not 2000 and I am 2000 on other chess sites which I play.

Furthermore, If you was to reread the forum again and look at what I have actually said.

You would find out I never once said following my method would get a person to 2,000.

I said following my advice might help a player learn faster than a player who only uses chess principles.

I tryed to use logical agruments to help people understand why.

They simply misread what I have said and made the assumption I was saying 30 moves memorization or some nonsense.

I was discussing this because this was my experince I was talking about.

I was sharing the problems I faced when I used chess principles only and not an opening line.

I struggled for a few months using chess princples. Than I changed into using an opening line and I manage to get to were I am today in about 1 year.

I strongly believe I would of gotten to this point faster if I had used openings sooner. I believe I wasted a few months with opening principles only to come to no avail.

If they are scepticial they do not have to believe me. I was merely sharing my advise. Which is what I thought the whole point of forums was about. People asking for advice and other people sharing there thoughts on the issue.

In response to your text in Green.

You are exactly right IM Silman and a few other GM do not have a rating here. However, they do have ratings esle were.

This was the whole point I was making.

The CM said I was not 2000 going off of my chess ranking only on chess.com.

When he knows nothing about me.

He doesn't know what ratings I have on other chess sites.

He doesn't know if I play OTB or not.

He made a wrong assumption.

He is a CM which means he has a rating of 2200+ OTB. However, his chess.com ranking is unrated.

Does that mean he is unrated player?

No it does not!

If a person was to make the assumption the CM was a unrated 1200 player they would be wrong because his chess.com ranking does not show a true account of his strength. Since he has rankings esle where.

Which is the whole point I was making when I said my retort to him.

In response to your text in Blue.

He never claimed he was qualified to give the best advice or even people should definitely listen to him. He suggested for OP to ask trainers and GMs.

^^^^^^^^

Yes you are right he never claimed to give the best advice or for people to listen to him. The advice the CM gave the OP was to ask trainers and GMs. Bascially he didn't really give the OP alot of advice.

Pawning the OP off to a trainer or a GM is advice a 500 rated player could say.

However, It is still no different than me? I never told people my advice was the best. I simply shared my experince with the OP. I gave him my advice which worked for me!

He doesn't have to follow it if he doesn't wish too. I simply shared my opinion on this discussion forum.

In response to your text in Purple.

You are the one claiming to be at 2000 level and giving the "best" advice to people to get to your level.

^^^^^^^^

I never once said this! Reread the entire forum you will see.

The CM was the person who said 2000 never came from my lips or text.

I only said 2000 after he said I am not 2000. When on other chess sites I am!

People on this thread have a habit of putting words in the mouths of others. Pretending people say stuff which they never said.

If you actually read this forum you will see.

The only thing I did say with a number was on post #40

I said 1800+

However, on chess.com I am 1800+.

It is a long way off of 2000.

Which means the CM made up the number 2000 and made an assumption I was not 2000. Which is wrong assumption.

I am 2000 on other chess sites.

I find many players do not play standard time controls on chess.com.

I rarely get any games. The ones I do get are often against engine players. Who than get there accounts closed next day or too. This is my experince with standard games on chess.com.

I seek for hours sometimes with no games. I guess I would be better off playing computer impossible 4 in standard lol.

However, I would like to play against humans. Which is why I had to use other websites to play standard time controls in.

In response to your text in Orange.

You have to understand why people like Bg5 doesn't agree with you (If a 2500 or a reputed trainer argued with him, he probably be more open minded to their opinions).

^^^^^^^^^^

Bg5 is an imbecile.

I would not put any stock into what Bg5 has to say. I have blocked him. He only disagrees with me because he is upset that I have blocked him and made him look foolish many times before.

Do you want prove?

OK

Read post #9

I give the OP some helpful beginner advice. The London System and the Italian Game are both very solid lines which are usually always recommended to beginners.

I also made an article on the London System which is why I shared it with the OP

Read post #12

Bg5 is upset that I am even speaking on a forum! He begins to disagree with me about everything.

Read post #17

I show him why he is wrong and why the London System is recommended to beginners.

Read post #20

He tells me the London System is terrible for beginners because once they finish the Opening they are going to be confused in the middle game.

Well NEWSFLASH!  I believe a beginner is going to be lost in the middle game whether he follows an opening or not BECAUSE HE IS A BEGINNER!

THE PROBLEM IS once a beginner is lost someone esle has to help him get unlost!

If you are lost you need help to get unlost. If no one is there to help you. You will stay lost for a long time! Which will slow down your chess growth.

I try to tell them this on post number 23

BLOWS THEIR MINDS!

They have no idea what I said. They ask me to rephrase what I have said on post number 23.

I post again on post number 26.

They are more confused now than they was before!

I don't know why they are confused.

I thought they was confused because I was explaining it poorly. Which is why I tryed to say what I am trying to say differently so they could understand.

An yet it still does not help them understand.

Which leads me to believe that there is nothing wrong with my explaination it is just they are not able to absorb the information I am providing.

If they understood what I was saying and was simply chosing to ignore it or do another option. It would be prefectly fine with me!

However, That is not what is happening here. They simply do not understand. It is like I am speaking another language to them.

I have tryed to convey my message 3-4 different times with no success.

The reason I have tryed so many times is because I thought the problem was with me. I thought my explanations was not good so I tryed to redo my explainations better so they could understand.

However, I am starting to believe the problem is not with me conveying my message. It is with there understanding. They can not process the message.

I guess their chess understanding is not high enough to understand my words.

Oh well at least I tryed that is for sure.

Some people don't even try.

However, that is what happen on this forum. The evidence is on the forum you can read it if you don't believe me.

@X_PLAYER_J_X

My comments wasn't meant to be a personal attack. I came up with the 2000 number because I was arguing with Bg5 about the importance of tactics up to that level. I was basically saying he shouldn't undervalue the importance of tactics to reach 2000, especially since he has not reached that level. But I ranted about this entire thread and you got caught up along.

You have a fair point that I wouldn't know your rating on other sites. My initial skepticism was the large and how recent the sample of your games were, so there is some degree of accuracy to those figures. But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt about your overall skill level based on your performance on other sites (not sure if you play OTB) since you are adamant about that.

As for the part where you said I didn't give OP any advice, you should read again. I emphasized the importance of building tactical strength at such an early stage. Hence, I suggested Italian game over the London System as the open games (1.e4 e5) are very important for beginners to learn about tactical motifs (motifs on f7, motifs on h7 like the greek gift) and kingside attacking plans which is in my opinion to be prioritised for a beginner, even over some positional plans. Therefore, I feel the Italian game offers more opportunities for these skill development over the london system.

X player @

I don't have anything PERSONAL against you. I have admit more than once that I LIKE you, I even said that I LOVE your style and innocent intentions of YOURS to help people. I WILL NEVER BLOCK YOU.

All my trying to say to you, is that beginners should not follow copy-paste ideas nowhere because they will simply not improve their game! My disagreement with the LONDON system is that it's not useful for them because does not provide the useful information a beginner needs after the opening finishes!! You can't sent someone to university if he don't finish first the High School.

A original chess trainer will never introduce a opening to a beginner. He will use the first three or fine moves of the Italian or Spanish or Scotch but he will never refer the names because what he wants from the beginner is to understand the logic of moves the purpose and how this first three or five affect the continuation of the game.

A beginner should learn to deal first with simple pawn structures and open positions in the center , so to be able at the same understand the tension between pieces!! and learn through this process.

The London system it's a eccuation for them impossible to understand and at the same time useless because close the position, the tension between pieces is zero, only the dark bishops come across and YOU X player need to explain to a beginner WHY he must to retreat the dark bishop back to g3 rather to capture. What a useful information for a beginner!! Congrats X Player! Your Mama is proud!

CM Squishey @

I have already answer to your post. I never argued with you for the priority training someone on tactics. That is a terrible LIE of yours! My argument has to do with the absolute of your statement that what a chess player needs to reach that level of 2000 it's only tactics! You are WRONG, like it or not! You didn't reach 2000 only study tactics, you trained your self in several parts of the game.

The importance of tactics in chess has nothing to do with levels! If YOU CM Squishey spent one hours a day solving tactic puzzles to become a Master titled, you need two hours from now on to become a FM and three to reach IM.

Studying tactics is the food and water of a chess player.

In response to text in Red.

I thought you was. If you was not trying to than I am sorry.

In response to text in Green.

Yeah I never believe Bg5.

I blocked him long ago.

Tactics are very important.

You are right! He is wrong.

What an absurd thing for Bg5 to say.

In response to text in Blue.

Well I am glad someone understands what I have been trying to say.

I tell you it is real frustrating when you are trying to explain something and the people you are explaining to are completely lost.

I reached someone esle out there who understand. It is like a success story. I am satisfied now.

In response to text in Orange.

Yes you are correct.

I see now in your text from before.

Yeah the Italian Game is very solid line recommended to beginners as well.

I played the Italian Game when I was a beginner. I liked that line.

I have recommended it before as well check out post #17 ;however, I haven't made a blog on it. Which is why I could not provide a link to it.

I made a blog on the London System so that is why I showed that link.

In response to text in Purple.

It is to personal to discuss.

My heart is torn.

I can't say which one I like more than the other. They are beautiful diamonds in the rough.

Both have there unique merits and rich spicy-ness.

I just can't make that decision. You are a brave person.

Of course I didn't just study tactics. I learnt about all facet of the game including openings, middlegames and endgames. The 99% chess is tactics is a quote from a famous player, to show how important tactics is, not to be taken literally. I wasn't trying to construe that you said tactics is not important.

For example, the author of rapid chess improvement got from club level to 2100 just by doing 3hrs of tactics a day for 300 days. But of course, he had some idea of strategy and chess in general. You can't play chess just by forks and pins.

@abrahampenrose I advise you to play as many games as you can. And annotate all of your games writing your thoughts of the important moves, look through them really deeply and try to find bad habits you make (e.g. superficial thinking, flaws in your analysis, calculation errors). It's good to have a coach to help you out. They are really cheap imo.

CM Squishey @

Ok, I understand that it was a misunderstanding but the impression you gave from your words to XPatzerX it's something different : You wrote " I came up with the 2000 number because I was arguing with Bg5 about the importance of tactics up to that level. I was basically saying he shouldn't undervalue the importance of tactics to reach 2000 "

I know how to read Master and I never argued with you for this subject and I never undervalued tactics.

My point was that you undervalued all the rest in favor of tactics! Chess is not that easy game. You have to know when to make a decision for a capture or a trade beyond the reason of a tactic situation. We under 2000 rated players and I am proud for being under 2000, it's a healthy procedure and very instructive, face those circumstances OTB continuesly were a tactical decision it's more than a tactic, it's a strategy, it's a technique, it's an access of the position. We don't need to become 2100 or titled players to taste the game as you do, even if the frequency of quality it's more rare than your games!

CM Squishey and the rest of this thread, you need to understand that I didn't come here pretend that I know how to help a beginner learn chess. I was a beginner and I went to a chess school before many years when I was young. My chess coach-teacher never spoke for names or variations or any lines. He introduced to us the value of material and how is connected with space and time in chess! In order to give us the best examples that will benefit our understanding to adopt the values of the game he used SIMPLE pawn structures, one symmetry or anti-symmetry and he developed pieces in their most affective square, near to center. First Knights , then bishops, castle , develop Queen in a square that is active but not easy being harassed and at the same time he explained the theory of moves, alternatives, piece tension, why and when to capture or not, when favors to simplify a position e.t.c

He never spoke for name of openings, he never showed variations as forcing preferences or lines because what a beginner needs to understand first is the theory of moves and then the importance why to follow a line. That calls METHODOLOGY which X Player denies that exist!

I am arguing with him for his philosophy to understand chess with that way. He doesn't allow me to help him. He is nervous and insecure.

@Bg5 

I have no intention of offending you, so I apologise if it appears that way. I admit there are probably knowledge about training players that you know even more than me... This was probably a misunderstanding.

I definitely presented myself as undervaluing positional chess and only looking at tactics, that's not my intention. Positional chess is very important and there are alot of good methodology to build chess understanding to a master level (see International Chess School headed by super GM Istratescu.).

@X_PLAYER_J_X

Sorry if it appears that I'm looking down at you or Bg5. It was not my intention of offending you. When I looked back at your posts, alot of the talk about strategic element and positional chess was well written, and it's clear you have alot of passion in exchanging your ideas.

I was initially fustrated, being a new member on chess.com, to see a heated exchange between posters in a thread where OP, just wanted to find a simple opening to play. And I thought people might be making this off putting for him, hence I started ranting. 

I think the majority of people agree that italian games (and open games in general) are good for beginners (I started off playing those myself) and it may be possible that the London System is also applicable.

"... the author of rapid chess improvement got from club level to 2100 ..."

It says 2041 at the USCF site.

It is perfectly OK CM Squishey.

I understand completely.

Bg5 brings out the rant in everyone. Even Holy people would begin to agrue with him.

I have blocked him 5 times already. My block function is broken. It keeps showing his forum post to me for some reason.

He always wants to disagree.

He believes his method is the only method on the planet. It is such nonsense.

Than he has such nerve to say at this chess school his teacher didn't tell him the opening line names. It is obvious that chess school was lacking funds for the program and had to hire a low level chess teacher. Who knew nothing about chess.

Of course that teacher seemed like a super star in his little young eyes!

It is obvious I do not take him serious.

We have to learn patience with people like this Squishey that is all you can do against these types of people.

Yeah I talked alot about the London System enough already.

We should talk about the Italian Game.

It is a line recommended to beginners as well.

I see no reason not to talk about this line on this opening forum.

Maybe it will inspire people to give it a try.

I am planning to make a blog about it in the near future. I just trying to finish up some of my existing ones and I have been some what busy in real life.

However, I do have like 5 different chess video I found on it.

I didn't make them but some one esle made them. I found them to be very simple for beginners.

Yeah I am going to put them in my blog as well.

However, it is nice to share with people. It can never be used enough.

This is what I think beginners need very simple and easy instruction to get them started off right.

I do not know the rating of the person in the video.

However, I think he gives some very nice basic idea's.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gX4to7ly1Y&index=29&list=PLPaM3qJ0ieXsZkPDAwkiT4jtV5MWGQXEI

X player @

No hard feelings X player, I still love you. I admire your passion learning about chess, I jealous your will, your determination to improve its beyond the human limit, I like your fighting spirit, you are a true warrior. I believe you are doing a great job inspiring people to study and learn chess and you are a magnificent person.

I WILL NEVER BLOCK YOU.