Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

How deeply do you know the main lines of your favorite opening(s)?

How deeply do you know the main lines of your favorite opening(s)?

  • 2-3 moves
  • 4-6 moves
  • 7-8 moves
  • 8-10 moves
  • 10-15 moves
  • 16-20 moves (or more!)

Created on October 14, 2011 | 7959 Votes | 40 Comments

Comments


  • 22 months ago

    chebf123

    here's my new comment

    now i know them all the way up 'til,  it's on....

  • 3 years ago

    Roeczak

    I know the alapin sicilian for 13 moves

  • 3 years ago

    chebf123

    main lines don't work for me.  the other player is not going to go alone with the whole thing.  2-3 move and it's onnnnn.

  • 3 years ago

    Kantplaychess

    2-3 max, seeing as though I don't actually have any favourite opening lines.  Seriously, you can be a very reasonable player without knowing any opening theory whatsoever.

  • 3 years ago

    ShyamGopal

    Sicilian Dragon Yuoslav Attack 15+ moves deep, rest 5-15

  • 3 years ago

    assassino173

    vienna game to the mate :D

  • 3 years ago

    nyLsel

    nice to see that

  • 3 years ago

    saksipotku

    jsnwisdom wrote:

    "For those players that are 1800 or above, how much of your chess training time goes into opening theory vs other potential chess lessons? I'm a 1550 player and my goal is to improve steadily to 1800 or better one day. "
    That's a good question. I once heard that grandmasters use approximately 90% of their chess-practicing time to studying opening. I have an OTB rating of approximately 2300, and I use maybe something like 75% studying openings.
  • 3 years ago

    nyLsel

    10-15! :)

  • 3 years ago

    nyLsel

    10-15

  • 3 years ago

    lastwarrior2010

    Marshall Gambit, about 15ish moves deep.

  • 3 years ago

    jsnwisdom

    For those players that are 1800 or above, how much of your chess training time goes into opening theory vs other potential chess lessons? I'm a 1550 player and my goal is to improve steadily to 1800 or better one day.
  • 3 years ago

    kiltking1

    Nf6+

  • 3 years ago

    NM flashboy2222

    I know most of my openings5-15 moves

  • 3 years ago

    chesshoudini

    I know the queen's gambit accepted and declined 10-15 and 1...Nf6 lines, slav, tarrasch, and many others very deeply.

  • 3 years ago

    AllogenicMan

    @ paul211:

    Interesting - and thanks for the 'suggestion[?]' ...

    But could it possibly be then, that next time you try to get your 'idea' across, you speak in layman's English? - thanks ...

  • 3 years ago

    AllogenicMan

    @ pauix:

    Well I could care less about your 'Traxler Attack' - I think it's rather unsound anyways ... What you don't seem to understand is that any opening variation will inevitably be susceptible to the possibility for some varying degree of attacking chance, both towards that of Black or White, in any phase of the game - either within or out of the variation so chosen. 

    No one opening [variation] is [yet] 'perfected' enough to safely draw by either side within the realm of opening theory.  Safe as it sounds though, in a 'perfect' world, chess would be a meaningless exercise to all who dare to refute its [current] codified 'key' to otherwise play on for some kind of pyrrhic victory.  And only then - should the time ever come[?!] - will memory be of any use in the recording of those opening variations [along with its games] which produce the quickest draws for all to bear witness as mere entertainment, as the game lays within some museum, to be invited once more towards a revived resurrection.

    But until that day comes (which only appears apparent to approaching, though if in fact ever will[?] ... ), we can only settle with yet continuing our course of confining ourselves to muddle on with our [still] limited approach of the game through the phase of opening 'theory', only hoping to stumble upon some conclusively defining reply/move for either Black or White, either of which [may] lead to a won or drawn game result.  But as it currently stands now, even with a duplication of an exact sequence of moves within a particular variation in question - played by either side - will only produce an inconclusive game result, leaving us to question whether the face value of opening 'theory' is not only just that[!], but something to be left alone to the memory bank for all our chess databases to merely entertain themselves with ...

    So in this end then, what we can at least say of our efforts up to now behind opening exploration, or 'theory' (whether our attempts in theory are not only 'justified' in finding the best moves/replies for both White/Black, or more reserved towards discovering some obscure variation[s] which ultimately leads to always producing the chess theorist's highest dreams for any desired [won/drawn] game result - i.e. cracking the game's secret 'code'), is that it has only represented thus far something of a misnomer in relation within its field for applicable 'scientific' value.  Perhaps then, the term should be abandoned altogether for keepsake, replacing it with: 'The Definitive Memorandum of Modern Opening Anomalies [Handbook]' - as chess is, still largely - yet! - a game of chance for trial and error.

    And that's the way 'I' see it! ...

  • 3 years ago

    IM Kallatroh

    I voted 4-6. Mostly because I change my openings often so I also often forget the theory. In a game though I can play 20+ moves of theory but that is only because I have just prepared for it a few hours before.

  • 3 years ago

    monocetoris

    Wink2 or3 moves is simply enougn because the difficult of chessCool

  • 3 years ago

    o0paradigm0o

    *** This result needs to be analyzed vis-a-vis respondents' ELO. would be interesting to see if a higher ELO group on average calculates farther. One would THINK this is the case. ;) 

Back to Top

Post your reply: