1.d4 the best beginner opening and not 1.e4

Sort:
ssctk
SamuelAjedrez95 wrote:
ssctk wrote:

🙃 Fair enough. Well I think they still could have explored some fun and rich openings as well as those skills.

I don't really like the Alapin or Scandinavian. Scotch is good. You know they could play the Scotch against the Sicilian and it's more fun though lol.

I also wouldn't say it takes years of study to play an opening. What I studied of the Najdorf were basically tabia positions and some common mistakes. This didn't take that long at all. It was very casual. I still play it and have fun games and win without having memorised long lines. People exaggerate way too much when they say stuff like there's way too much theory. The people who say this are just parroting someone else's view and never tried or tested it themselves.

 

What takes years to build is to do "learning" for our brain's neural nets to be well trained around sets of positions. As the saying goes "it takes 2000 hours to get good at something", if the repertoire is too spread out and it's a collection of a lot of somethings like a 2700+ repertoire is, the thousands of hours required to be good at it are just too many for non-professionals.

 

In all thematic tabiyas the players I mentioned play best moves nearly always, in a sense their in-repertoire rating is higher than out-of-repertoire, the reason is not memorising long lines, they actually don't play openings where this is required, there's no Keres attack in their repertoires, it's because they've learnt these positions really well.

There are openings however where long forced lines need memorisation, it's a choice whether one adopts them or not though, I much prefer to live without them.

 

Of course one can change openings over years, even change from 1.e4 to d4 to c4, but what is not possible is play all openings at the same time. Some of these folks have gone 1.e4->1.d4->1.c4 in a course of 20 years, others prefer to play the Scotch for 20+ years, depending on how they stay motivated but what nobody did is play everything at the same point in time.

SamuelAjedrez95
ssctk wrote:
 

So what if it's something like a 2700+ player's is when you are not playing at that level. Openings are not owned by or limited to certain rating classes. That's just elitism. You are playing it at your own level with people who are also your level.

You can get by learning the tabiya positions and then just trying it out and figuring things out as you go. This is actually a good thing as it develops your skills for finding the best moves instead of just memorising lines. If you do make a mistake then you remember it and play better next time.

The way you suggest that you have to memorise long lines of theory to play these openings in the first place is wrong. Trying and testing is a better way of learning than memorising.

It's also better to play openings which are actually fun and exciting to stay motivated and interested in the game. I would much rather play Winawer Poisoned Pawn and Fischer Sozin Attack, actually fun openings, than boring stuff like the French Exchange and Alapin Sicilian.

SamuelAjedrez95

It's just the fact that the problem you suggest doesn't exist. "If you play this opening then you will have to learn way too much theory and you will lose." I never had that experience and other people never had that experience. It's just something you are saying.

The problem literally does not exist. It's just created by fear.

ssctk

The point essentially is a 2700+ repertoire has too many tabiyas to absorb, so it's not possible for us non-professionals to play well the full breadth of such a repertoire.

SamuelAjedrez95
ssctk wrote:

The point essentially is a 2700+ repertoire has too many tabiyas to absorb, so it's not possible for us non-professionals to play well the full breadth of such a repertoire.

No it doesn't. If you like and enjoy the opening then it won't be too much. I did it for the Najdorf and learned all the major tabiyas.

Of course this is not everything as Najdorf has many different lines (which is part of what makes it such a fascinating opening), but knowing this much is plenty to get by at a lower level. By the point of learning this, you understand how a structure is formed in the Najdorf and where the pieces should normally go.

You play it out, if there are deviations, you think and try to adapt. If you make a mistake, you make a note of it. You play the game and enjoy the game.

The fact that you consider it a chore to learn openings and play chess is a problem specific to you and some others. I don't see this as a chore. I think it's fun and interesting.

SamuelAjedrez95

With the French as well, just learning this works fine.

Sure, there is more to know and you can make mistakes but that's part of the process of learning. You don't have to memorise everything perfectly before you play it. You learn as you go.

For the Ruy Lopez, you just learn the key ideas and adapt. Against the Berlin you can play d3.

It actually isn't hard to remember this.

SamuelAjedrez95

BOWTOTHETOAST

I
believe
that
the move d4 is not superior to e4



 

SamuelAjedrez95
NEETHUDAS123 wrote:

I
believe
that
the move d4 is not superior to e4

BOWTOTHETOAST
SamuelAjedrez95 wrote:
NEETHUDAS123 wrote:

I
believe
that
the move d4 is not superior to e4

what


is


That


Clip


From


What


Looks


Like


Family


Guy


grin


What


IS


IT


!


?


!


?


!

PON121730

I like e4 more but that's my opinion: )

VenemousViper

d4 is more positional, I personally prefer e4. openings

VenemousViper

Although I like the queen's gambit, (when I'm doing it).

SamuelAjedrez95

@NEETHUDAS123

South Park