Chess Openings For Beginners - Chess Forums

Kestony

Sep 18, 2018

0

#1

My recommendations for all you, dear chess beginners. If you want to say thanks, you can subscribe to my channel by clicking this link: https://www.youtube.com/kestony?sub_confirmation=1

Link to video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdMBHfkeSzY&feature=youtu.be

NM dpnorman

Sep 18, 2018

0

#2

The London is a perfectly good way to play chess, and I have done quite well with it against sub-2300 opposition OTB (although then again someone of my rating can't be expected to have a lot of success against 2300+ regardless of the opening anyway...) but it has gotten a little much lately the number of people who have recommended it to amateurs. It makes it a less attractive option to more serious players such as myself.

That doesn't mean that for beginners you didn't make a good video just now; actually you seem like a very good teacher for them.

It's just a little tiresome to see it recommended by everyone everywhere for amateur players. But I can't argue with its merits, and those who are most vociferous in their hatred for the London in general are typically those who have the least understanding of the positions. It's just some opening system after all.

dannyhume

Sep 18, 2018

0

#3

It may not matter, but it brings to mind the discussion of when a player should go for “simpler” openings ... after one is already a strong player or when training to be a strong player?

Perhaps it doesn’t matter for the 99.99% of us, but if you are given two 5 year-old children with equal raw talent, focus, enthusiasm, and willingness to learn, play, and compete in OTB chess, and one of them plays with the simpler repertoire and the other with the classical repertoire, how would that impact their development over, say, 5 years, 10, 15, for instance, assuming they study, compete and analyze the same amount?

NM dpnorman

Sep 18, 2018

0

#4

dannyhume wrote:

It may not matter, but it brings to mind the discussion of when a player should go for “simpler” openings ... after one is already a strong player or when training to be a strong player?

Perhaps it doesn’t matter for the 99.99% of us, but if you are given two 5 year-old children with equal raw talent, focus, enthusiasm, and willingness to learn, play, and compete in OTB chess, and one of them plays with the simpler repertoire and the other with the classical repertoire, how would that impact their development over, say, 5 years, 10, 15, for instance, assuming they study, compete and analyze the same amount?

If you're a beginner, you need to develop your pieces, and at the very least this helps you do that. You don't want to have to teach a u1400 player any opening theory. That's going to be a waste of time.

I'd say most people who play 1. d4 2. Bf4 at a reasonably high level do so in addition to playing other things. Very few players of my strength or higher that I have met play it exclusively but I know many including myself who play it sometimes.

Alltheusernamestaken

Sep 18, 2018

0

#5

I recommend the jerome gambit. Pretty solid

dannyhume

Sep 18, 2018

0

#6

More of an academic discussion given that opening suggestions for beginners vary for many reasons.

For instance ... play simpler openings so you can work on your tactics and endgames while safely getting to a middlegame ... play classical openings to follow the history of chess strategy ... play sharp dynamic openings so you can learn tactics and get a feel for the initiative ... play openings that expose you to a variety of pawn structures, and so on.

Anyway, thanks for the video link, ForceIsOnMySide, I enjoyed it, especially since I tried my hand with the London not too long ago.

Pawn_e1_Kenobi

Sep 19, 2018

0

#7

Thank you