Learn a few moves of the carro Khan or something instead
Beginner? Don't use this opening - It's too theoretical! Better yet, don't learn any openings!
Sort:
Apr 11, 2021
0
#123
chamo2074 wrote:
So basically you guys are saying that we are falling into the same point with different routes?
honestly it hurts my head
B1ZMARK wrote:
chamo2074 wrote:
B1ZMARK wrote:
chamo2074 wrote:
royalknight101 wrote:
That's exactly my point, if you make one move blunders, 700 moves combinasions that doesn't matter at all!!
Ben is hilarious btw thanks for the vid
If you make one move blunders then that's on you, not the opening. But don't you think that if you play an opening you know, chances of hanging pieces would decrease significantly?
They would if they play the lines you study
But why not decrease the blunders in all situation, by learning tactics, instead of learning certain openings
What's the point of learning tactics if you don't know when to look for tactics? If you're never aware of how the pieces are set up in your opening, you can NEVER find the tactics. Example, my brother - he plays e4 and e5 (normie lmao) and Italian as white. But he almost never is able to find any Bxf7+ ideas, but when I ask him to look at Bxf7 - he always finds the right lines. HE just doesn't know to look for it.
And why would he not?? He's not doing the checklist what's the relation to the opening
B1ZMARK wrote:
chamo2074 wrote:
So basically you guys are saying that we are falling into the same point with different routes?
honestly it hurts my head
Same, I'll just go to sleep Good knight
Apr 11, 2021
0
#126
chamo2074 wrote:
And why would he not?? He's not doing the checklist what's the relation to the opening
It's easy to say "just do a check list". But what if you don't know what your "threats" or "potential threats" are?
Ok, so IMO
Just learn opening principles when you are 600-800
learn a simple opening like the scandi when you are 800-1200
Then, learn a more complex-ish opening, and start studying it little by little
So the thing is, if someone is that low-rated, who said they will actually be updating their theory? If it's too painful they'll just get lazy, same if they don't understand all the moves. But then again you have a point and I'll continue tomorrow because I am lost
Apr 11, 2021
0
#130
royalknight101 wrote:
well sorry for being realistic dude cause your literally acting like it doesnt have any impact at all and that a beginner is a GM
Bad, decent, and good are subjective adjectives. Meanings change from person to person.
Apr 11, 2021
0
#131
little_guinea_pig wrote:
oh look another thread by B1Z that degenerated into craziness
why am I not surprised
no it just hurts my head
Apr 11, 2021
0
#132
Yeah, I wasn't talking about beginner as in someone just completely incapable of not hanging pieces.
Apr 11, 2021
0
#133
What's wrong with learning openings as a beginner?
If you don't then BAM
Fools mate.
Apr 11, 2021
0
#134
Wow. I played terribly less than a year ago
And the reason for my demise...
Not knowing openings.
Apr 11, 2021
0
#135
I mean, they did play with e3.
So it doesn't have anything to do with openings.
Apr 11, 2021
0
#136
Definately agree. This was my opening repertiore up until around 2000
Apr 11, 2021
0
#137
B1ZMARK wrote:
TruthMuse wrote:
When I'm teaching someone new to chess, typically after learning how to make the moves, I start them on the end game. How to win with a rook and King, they learn opposition and how pieces need to work together then other possible end game possibilities. At the start, I think that will help them; they will learn openings as they play them and when they gather enough knowledge to grasp the finer points.
I'm not against these kinds of teaching. What I'm against is the reasoning, i.e. "too much theory", "you don't need openings", etc.
I mean, openings literally define the type of middlegame positions and the types of tactics that arise. So if you aren't well versed in either of those, or you play a middlegamee you don't understand, then you're just screwed. Which is why I don't like the "only need opening principles" argument. Not all equal positions are created equal.
I agree every part of the game is important, from the Opening, Middle game, and End games. Beginners playing other beginners need to know how to win won games. This, I think, is my main point, nothing needs to be neglected, but there needs to some systematic way to get them quickly from novice to someone with a clue.
Apr 11, 2021
0
#138
royalknight101 wrote:
JackRoach wrote:
I mean, they did play with e3.
So it doesn't have anything to do with openings.
the vans isn't a bad opening and i recommend it to all players as its very flexible unlike the london
E4 is better. I don't play the London anymore, but might start playing it again or e4 or some other queen pawn opening.
I disagree
I didn't learn ANY OPENINGS until I was 1800 OTB
tbh i got there quickly only took a year
looooooooooooool
It's all related
you're mother dont ask