I understand what you are saying.
When your opponent plays a "non-book" move, it is your job to work out its deficiencies and then exploit them. Your ability to react appropriately depends upon your understanding of the position and playing strength.
There are no shortcuts, so join the club and suffer along with the rest of us.
I think you're perfectly clear. I understand what you mean & I've encountered that more times than not.
To be helpful to you, I can't give you advice on whether or not to follow the opening line because it's situational. Depending on what your opponent does, it may be good to make the next move in the line, or it may be very very bad to make that next move. You may improve your position, or you may leave yourself wide open because you're essentially ignoring what your opponent is doing.
My advice to you is to study opening principals. These are not specific moves to make in a specific order, but they actually explain why the opening lines work. What is accomplished when both players make those specific sets of moves? What are they attacking and what are they defending with each move? That's what you need to understand.
Do some tutorials on opening principals and you'll feel more comfortable. Redo them a few times after playing a few more games if you need to. I think you'll feel less lost at sea when your opponent doesn't do what you want him or her to do. ;)
prawn dido on that, I just say get pieces to nice squares, control the center, and decide which side to castle on if any, then go after his King, Thats where TT comes in handy
yup, learning the book lines can be confusing, especially since games rarely go just that way. prawns has it right: THINK about each move your opponent makes, decide if it was inaccurate for any reason, and then try to capitalize on that. best way to go. that alone will get you to 1800 if you think critically.
here's one thing that i'll bet earns you 100 points in a week: after every move, be it yours or his, ask yourself if there are CHECKS - especially in the opening. if i had a dime for every time i lost a piece due to an annoying queen check in the opening when i was learning, i could probably retire. :)
First, simply because a move is not the "book move" doesn't make it bad (though at lower levels it PROBABLY is at least sub-optimal).
What's important is to understand the basic ideas of the opening and then to focus on if you're opponent's move allows you to gain any advantage based on the position on the board or not. If it does, then take it. If it doesn't, then you need to ask if their move requires you to change your plan. If it does, get a new plan. If not, then continue marching on knowing they'll be in at least a slightly worse position than otherwise.
Every move on the chess board has positive and negative consequences. Part of getting better at chess is to figure out, for every move, all of those consequences for your opponent's move. The trick is getting all of them, not just the obvious ones.
Just study the principles. No two chess games are the same, so don't expect a book move to flow perfectly. Your opponent has probably studied the same moves and knows what you are doing.
Don't be predictable.
A good opening book will explain why the most common out-of-book moves are weaker. I don't remember which book(s) but I have at least one somewhere that does just that. It also explains why some moves can't be transposed. I think that any author that doesn't explain why natural looking non-book moves are weak hasn't done their job.
I may be thinking of "Chess Openings: Theory and Practice" or an older of copy something from the MacMillan Chess Library. I don't know.
Hi all I have a question which might seem a bit silly, but please bear with me! Ok, so I get openings, but I have one question. When I'm following an opening in a tutorial book, say my Chess for Idiots, or whatever, it explains the moves which I totally get, BUT it explains them as though your opponent is making the correct moves of the opening in reply. That hardly EVER happens to me. Within one or two moves the opponent makes moves that aren't part of the opening. I don't understand what you do then. It's a fundamental thing I just don't get. I'm sure top players play opening moves by the book, but when I'm paying someone on chess.com or a friend, they never play the opposing opening moves. Do you see what I'm not getting? I hope I'm being clear cause it's a question that's foxed me for so long. Is the idea that when they play non-opening moves you stick to the opening with the opening plan, giving you an advantage? That's just a wild guess, I really don't know. Please help! Thanks in advance. If you want me to make it clearer what I mean, please do say! David