That is a very good question. The majority of opening books teach you how to play against good moves, not bad ones.
One thing you can try, is to plug the position (including the deviation) into an engine, that way you will probably find tactical refutations if they exist. [edit:after the game is over, of course! :)]
If the deviation is more of a positional or strategic mistake, it is much more difficult without a good understanding of the idea behind the opening.
"As a low level chess player, the majority of my games break from the opening book lines very quickly. So seeing as how black's moves in the openings are considered "best" for a particular line, what happens when a weak opponent plays a non book move? Theoretically white should be better, correct?"
Because your move is a "non book move", this in itself does not mean that it is a bad move. You said you break away from established norms quickly...well this is exactly how new openings were developed...outside the box.
Hi guys,
First I would look to see if I could win material. If not, then I think you should continue to develop normally. If you make good solid developing moves you should come out of the opening with a nice position.
Watch your backrank.
Not all deviations are bad or refutable, though they might be (slightly to moderately) inferior or out of fashion. What you want can be obtained by building up a solid groundwork in opening theory - a book like FCO might help:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1906454132
ReedRichards wrote-
"Because your move is a "non book move", this in itself does not mean that it is a bad move. You said you break away from established norms quickly...well this is exactly how new openings were developed...outside the box."
RainbowRising replied-
"ignore reedrichards advice, its utter nonsense."
There was no advice given...so I don't understand your message.
if youre in the boat where youre having trouble when an opponent plays a dubious move instead of following book (but you dont know what to do) I would take a break from learning books moves to begin with. just focus on that tactics... and play openings that a principle-based vs. line base.
then youll be able to spot if a novelty is bad or good, and your assesments will also improve
BTW it is beyond the capacity of most beginners to fathom the intricacies of the majority of book openings - they have been shaped by masters over a pretty long time.
e.g.: It took me a month to master the intricacies of Queen's Gambit Accepted - also a pretty long time to find the "refutation" (though my analysis was later found to be faulty after years - better lines existed) of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6?!
So taking guidance of books specializing in opening theory (like FCO I mentioned above) or chess coaches/mentors seem to me the only practical solution, unless you have LOTS of time.
I was not giving any advice...rather I was just giving my opinion that because a move is not from a book, that does not make it a bad move. How do you think openings were established in the first place? Because players had the guts to try none-book moves.
Thanks guys, some sound advice here.
dsarkar, I stumbled across FCO when it first was released and was interested in it. After reading nothing but good reviews it will be in my next Amazon order. Thanks for bringing it back to my attention.
And to ReedRichards and RainbowRising (RR and RR, hmm...looks like split personalities arguing) if you want to bicker, please do it somewhere else other than my thread. Nothing that the two of you have said even comes close to answering my question or promoting this topic. I award you both no points, and may God have mercy on your souls.
To "FaustArp", sorry if I offended you in any way...this was not my intention.
To "FaustArp", sorry if I offended you in any way...this was not my intention.
Quite the opposite, your original reply was welcome. I was simply stating (via the movie "Billy Madison") that I didn't want the topic to turn into an argument between you RainbowRising, who unfortunately wasted our time by attacking your first reply .
To "FaustArp", sorry if I offended you in any way...this was not my intention.
Quite the opposite, your original reply was welcome. I was simply stating (via the movie "Billy Madison") that I didn't want the topic to turn into an argument between you RainbowRising, who unfortunately wasted our time by attacking your first reply .
IMO there is some truth to what Rainbow is saying though.. Id say he is spot on here
My biggest piece of advice is to learn the reasons for each move as you learn each opening. This way, when your opponent goes out of book you can figure out of it's still a good idea to develop your knight to f3, say, or if it would be better placed elsewhere. I often play the English opening with white, and at my level black often goes out of book rather quickly. Learning the reasons behind playing my king's knight to either f3 or e2 helps me figure out how I should develop it when black does so.
As a low level chess player, the majority of my games break from the opening book lines very quickly. So seeing as how black's moves in the openings are considered "best" for a particular line, what happens when a weak opponent plays a non book move? Theoretically white should be better, correct?
My problem is when this happens, I have no idea how to exploit this weakness. I know that most opening theory is based on the idea that your opposition is going to play optimal moves and at a certain point you come to a position where now white or black will have a good goal or plan. So if black breaks the book moves early, how does white continue?
Obviously a high rated player could handle the situation easily and come out of the opening with the advantage, but as a weak class player who follows the "don't study opening theory until you reach expert" rule (though I do look at opening lines just to have something to play), I usually am not able to come out better than equal.