x
Chess - Play & Learn

Chess.com

FREE - In Google Play

FREE - in Win Phone Store

VIEW

1000-1300 rated openings for black

  • #21

    Sure, everybody has ABILITIES in different areas.  Some are going to be able to learn chess faster than others simply because the algorithms in their brain's neural network are more efficient at indexing geometrical-spacial information.  The other person might be brilliant with language and communication.  We ARE all different.  And you can learn whatever you want to learn about regarding chess, but if you are trying to improve as fast as possible rating-wise, most chess games under 2000 are decided by tactics, so getting a perfect opening isn't going to help you win a game if you are likely going to blunder a couple of pawns 3 moves into the middlegame.  Tactics are the critical moment of the game, that one moment that likely decided who wins and who loses.  Tactics are just patterns.  And the more complete your database of patterns is in chess, the quicker you will be able to learn an opening anyway.  A player who is 2000 strength tactics will be able to learn an opening in much less time than a player who is 1200 strength in tactics because the 2000 will be able to use chunking of known patterns to quickly account for all the variations while a 1200 will be unfamiliar with all of the tactics and will have to do more memorizing than actual learning.

  • #22
    h4_explosive wrote:
    chodge4 wrote:
    Should I learn a black opening vs both the King and queen pawn?

    yes, I really think you should. relatively  easy openings to learn would be the French against e4 and Queen's Gambit Declined against d4. of course "learning an opening" doesn't mean that you should learn complex lines that are 20 moves deep, but you should definitely learn the basic ideas of these openings and the standard moves (this will probably take less than 2 hours per opening) middle games are much more essential at your level, but a good opening ist still important.

    thank you all for the responses and yes I am very turned away from the Sicilain defense due to its complexity and the fact as white when I face it, it is never a fun game to review from either side. So what I have taken away from this, and somebody correct me if they believe what I am doing is incorrect, but the french and queens gambit declined depending on which opening white chooses so understand the concepts of them, what their overall goal is. The first few moves will be consistent but I should focus my time on the mid game after the first 4,5,6 moves. Any other feedback is great and if you happen to know (which im sure you chess experts do know) what is the overall goal of the french defense I am going to go do some research on it but any tips are great from the community. Thank you all<3

  • #23
    AntonioEsfandiari wrote:

    You can pick an opening as white and a couple of defenses as black to stick with, and you can look at master level games in that opening on chessgames.com but if you are devoting significant effort to studying openings under 1800 you are just wasting your time... I got to be a top 100 USCF rated player in my state of 8 million people from complete amateur in under 3 years without touching an opening book.  Don't waste your time on openings <1800, it is not teaching you chess, and when chess 960 becomes more popular than chess, all of your time will have been wasted.  TACTICS TACTICS TACTICS!

    dude love watching Esfandiari at the table! Beautiful! but yes thank you i think ive decided on the french and qgd and will stick with those and not go too indepth in the theory stuff. Just the concepts of them and start getting repititions at the mid game of them. thank you

  • #24
    kindaspongey wrote:

    Around 2010, IM John Watson wrote, "... For players with very limited experience, ... the Sicilian Defence ... normally leaves you with little room to manoeuvre and is best left until your positional skills develop. ... I'm still not excited about my students playing the Sicilian Defence at [the stage where they have a moderate level of experience and some opening competence], because it almost always means playing with less space and development, and in some cases with exotic and not particularly instructive pawn-structures. ... if you're taking the Sicilian up at [say, 1700 Elo and above], you should put in a lot of serious study time, as well as commit to playing it for a few years. ..."
    In 2014, Pete Tamburro wrote, "... You will see [in Openings for Amateurs] the reply to 1.e4 to be the great reply of the open games with 1...e5. The Sicilian Dragon is presented as an alternative. ... I have found that scholastic players take to the Sicilian Dragon very quickly. ... A cautionary note: the Dragon is good at club level, but as you start facing better players you're going to find yourself memorizing tons of lines and the latest analysis, ... From my experience with coaching players below 1800, you won't need to do that too much. ..."
    "As a professional player, I participate in many opens. I need at least 7.5/9 for the first place so I have little margin for mistakes. ... It suffices to mention the 6.Bg5-attack with forced variations all the way up to move thirty or more, to understand my reluctance to use the Najdorf. ... The Dragon is even more unfit for a main repertoire. The same long narrow forced variations, many dead drawn endgames in some lines without h4, and on top of all - the unbearable sight of the d5-square, where one White piece replaces another. ..." - GM Alexander Delchev (2006)

    "Generally speaking, 'Starting Out' and 'Sicilian Najdorf' are not exactly words that one envisions in the same title, because anyone who is just starting out should not dive into the vast ocean of theory that is the Najdorf. For beginners, the time invested in studying even minor lines can be more productively used solving tactical puzzles and basic endgame technique.
    ...
    ... In some lines, a good understanding of basic principles will take you far, while in others, such as the Poisoned Pawn (6 Bg5 e6 7 f4 Qb6!?), memorization is a must, as one wrong move can cost you the game in the blink of an eye. ..." - FM Carsten Hansen (2006)
    https://web.archive.org/web/20140626175558/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen87.pdf

    You seem back and forth in this message. You would or would not reccomend it? I personally shy away from the sicilian because of my rating and its complexity but for others my rating who may read this are their easier variations that might be suitable for my rating?

  • #25
    AntonioEsfandiari wrote:

    ... most chess games under 2000 are decided by tactics, ...

    Is it perhaps easier to achieve a favorable decision if a player has managed to avoid a difficult position?

    "... Review each of your games, identifying opening (and other) mistakes with the goal of not repeatedly making the same mistake. ... It is especially critical not to continually fall into opening traps – or even lines that result in difficult positions ..." - NM Dan Heisman (2007)
    https://web.archive.org/web/20140627062646/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman81.pdf

  • #26
    AntonioEsfandiari wrote:

    ... getting a perfect opening isn't going to help you win a game if you are likely going to blunder a couple of pawns 3 moves into the middlegame. ...

    Is anyone advocating that a player not study tactics?

  • #27
    AntonioEsfandiari wrote:

    Sure, everybody has ABILITIES in different areas.  Some are going to be able to learn chess faster than others simply because the algorithms in their brain's neural network are more efficient at indexing geometrical-spacial information.  The other person might be brilliant with language and communication.  We ARE all different. ... A player who is 2000 strength tactics will be able to learn an opening in much less time than a player who is 1200 strength in tactics ...

    Can we anticipate that, from one player to another, there is a lot of difference in the amount of time that will go by without achieving "2000 strength tactcs"?

  • #28
    kindaspongey wrote:
    AntonioEsfandiari wrote:

    Sure, everybody has ABILITIES in different areas.  Some are going to be able to learn chess faster than others simply because the algorithms in their brain's neural network are more efficient at indexing geometrical-spacial information.  The other person might be brilliant with language and communication.  We ARE all different. ... A player who is 2000 strength tactics will be able to learn an opening in much less time than a player who is 1200 strength in tactics ...

    Can we anticipate that, from one player to another, there is a lot of difference in the amount of time that will go by without achieving "2000 strength tactcs"?

    Spongey Do you do tactics elsewhere? because I am seeing you have only done 160 tactics on this account?  Thats only like an hour a day for a week?  Maybe you just need to do LOTS more puzzles and i mean LOTS.  Don't be lazy,  Tactics tire your brain out for a reason, hard work= results.

  • #29
    h4_explosive wrote:
    Yigor wrote:

    The KID/Modern/Pirc/Robatsch defense is an universal opening vs virtually everything. 

    that's kinda true, but KID and Pirc for example have completely different ideas and concepts. If you play a Pirc like a KID (pawn storm on the kingside) you will be smashed off the board by any half-decent player

     

    Well, usually I play a mixture of KID, Pirc and St. Seorge and was never smashed during the opening by those "half-decent" players. tongue.png

  • #30
    chodge4 wrote:
    Should I learn a black opening vs both the King and queen pawn? Just one opening for either? Or just keep trying to wing it? Thanks any feedback is appreciated

    I recommend focusing on one white opening, one e4 defense, and one d4 defense. That's 3 openings to learn, which should cover most every opening you'll face (your d4 defensive ideas should be applicable against most any other opening white plays, with some slight adjustments along the way).

  • #31

    Sicilian

  • #32
    Yigor wrote:
    h4_explosive wrote:
    Yigor wrote:

    The KID/Modern/Pirc/Robatsch defense is an universal opening vs virtually everything. 

    that's kinda true, but KID and Pirc for example have completely different ideas and concepts. If you play a Pirc like a KID (pawn storm on the kingside) you will be smashed off the board by any half-decent player

     

    Well, usually I play a mixture of KID, Pirc and St. Seorge and was never smashed during the opening by those "half-decent" players. 

    you played a pawn storm against the Austrian Attack and didn't get smashed off the board by a half-decent player? sorry, I totally don't believe that happy.png please provide a game to prove I am wrong

    I never said that a mixture is not possible, just not the pawn storm that is typical in the KID. you are higher rated than me and therefore definitely a better player, but still it's simply true that black's play is mainly on the kingside in most KID main lines and almost exclusively on the queenside in all Pirc main lines (in the Austrian Attack for example it's actually white who starts a kingside attack, so totally different than the KID)

  • #33

     

Top

Online Now