^ Click here to remove ads! ^

Disaster Follows Theory

Jump to forum:
 
12th June 2008, 01:21pm
#1
by matthiassmall
United States
Member Since: Nov 2007
Member Points: 119

I found it very interesting in this blitz game that my opponent was able to pound out his/her moves in a split second during the opening. Afterwards, however, he/she became increasingly slow and made moves that are almost painful to watch.

 

Evidence that more time should be spent on general strategy than on opening specifics:

 


12th June 2008, 09:32pm
#2
by NM tonydal
United States
Member Since: Oct 2007
Member Points: 948
disaster follows piece hang
12th June 2008, 09:49pm
#3
by therobz
Auckland New Zealand
Member Since: May 2008
Member Points: 196
im not sure he studyed opening theory. in any short game, i will pound out early moves, perhaps not cos i know theory, but so i put all the pieces in decent places without tryin to attack, to save time.
12th June 2008, 10:02pm
#4
by Nimzo33
Honolulu United States
Member Since: Mar 2008
Member Points: 281

I think you're giving black too much, and then unjustly using him as an example of "memorizing not learning". I fail to see how black's opening is a good example of "theory-know-it-all"; With perhaps the exception of 0-0-0, all of black's moves can be logically found. His mistake, while silly, is simply just a mistake, and I'm sure it could happen to many people (especially in blitz.)

I also agree with <therobz> on the matter. 


12th June 2008, 10:28pm
#5
by fuze22
Mesa, Arizona United States
Member Since: Jan 2008
Member Points: 118
i think i have played about ten games just like that and that is when i know it is time to go to sleep.
13th June 2008, 05:23am
#6
by matthiassmall
United States
Member Since: Nov 2007
Member Points: 119

I really don't think anyone, in perfect honesty, can say that they would have played all of the moves for one of the more popular defenses against the Reti without having seen something like this first. Without exaggeration the clock was only down about two seconds for black after the opening. Found through logic, that would simply have to take much longer.


13th June 2008, 05:54am
#7
by buenotc
brooklyn Guyana
Member Since: May 2008
Member Points: 70
if he really studied openning  theory he should'nt have gotten  into that mess. for someone to really say he knows a particular openning and the variations he must know at least 20 classical moves in it with the traps,pitfalls and knowing when to step on the gas.hes just a noob who learnt a openning nothing more.
13th June 2008, 05:07pm
#8
by Nimzo33
Honolulu United States
Member Since: Mar 2008
Member Points: 281
matthiassmall wrote:

I really don't think anyone, in perfect honesty, can say that they would have played all of the moves for one of the more popular defenses against the Reti without having seen something like this first. Without exaggeration the clock was only down about two seconds for black after the opening. Found through logic, that would simply have to take much longer.


 You're missing the point. All of your opponents moves "can" be found quickly, and dude, seriously it was a just a blunder by your opponent. I think you're jumping to conclusion with regards to his learning habits (if he had any at all that is.)

 Your opponent could have played the set-up after his 8th move a bazillion times, and thus is able to blaze it out quickly, but that doesn't mean he knows the theory. 


 

Add your comment:

Join Chess.com for free to add your comment! Already a member? Then login now to comment.