Chess openings for beginners/ kids

The two most acclaimed series of books for beginners and not-so beginners are Ivaschenko's Chess School, and van Wijgerden's Steps Method.

They have many differences, and one thing in common:

No openings. None, zero, zilch. Did yiblai2 ever wondered why?

FIDE is giving to all attendants of his courses for training diplomas several guiding books. The most important of them is "64 Chess Lessons" by Simkin and Kruppa.Yuri Efimovich Simkin, who passed away a couple of years ago at the age of 81, was the founder of the Ukrainian Chess School. Yuri Kruppa, a strong Ukrainian Grandmaster with many participations in finals of the Soviet Championship finals.

This manual has a significant omission: No openings. None, zero, zilch. Apparently FIDE does not want to have good new players, or is clueless about training methods- is that so, yiblai2?

But... OK, I will let you suggest to the kids who come here and desperately seek  "opinings for aggressive attackers" your opening book XYZ, or any other marketing ploy you could think it would help (because you do want to help, that's fairly obvious).

Honestly, I do think that a patzer can really help and train another patzer. All he really needs is some knowledge of a working training method. I am sorry to say you know none, and you are suggesting/ assuming things at random. No matter how good your intentions are, they will do harm if they are unfocused and unfounded.

Didn't we recently see something similar about the Soviet Chess Primer? And didn't the reason turn out to be that there WERE openings discussed and left out of the English translation? I don't know why this or that series has or does not have this or that, but I don't see IM pfren QUOTING any explanation. MAYBE, IM pfren is correct about what was wanted, but it seems a little odd that IM pfren doesn't simply produce a quote.

No such thing.

X

Not to mention that I'm still eager to know who's on pills. No such thing either.

The problem isn't that you don't know (that is fairly obvious) but rather that you prefer assuming rather than learning.

"No such thing"? Is it you recommending Tamburro's (no FIDE rating, greatest USCF achievement 2nd category norm, average 2150 engine rating at ICCF) book in every second post (...a book with good intentions, and very bad content: titled "openings for amateurs", and giving plenty of engine dumps which go well past move twenty, without any verbal or rational explanation- what a great thing to suggest to an amateur!), or it is just your alter ego? Do you really learn chess by reading engine dumps?

Had I dared to publish such an "openings for amateurs" travesty, I'm afraid FIDE would seriously consider stripping me of my FIDE Trainer title!

So what do you think?

the first openings to teach are ruy lopez and queens gambit and french.Openings like sicilian,KID,grunfeld,KGA,KIA are too complicated for kids to understand. Also teach em the openings traps and principals

It's too early for the queen to move, in my humble opinion.

IM pfren wrote:

"The problem isn't that you don't know (that is fairly obvious) but rather that you prefer assuming rather than learning."

YOU are the one talking about these series. I am inviting you to produce a QUOTE about why these series don't have this or that, and, so far, I don't see it. I also don't see you saying anything about that previous commentary on The Soviet Chess Primer that we saw here. Why is that?

IM pfren wrote:

"Is it you recommending Tamburro's (no FIDE rating, greatest USCF achievement 2nd category norm, average 2150 engine rating at ICCF) book in every second post"

As anyone can tell, I do not recommend the Tamburro book "in every second post". It is not my book. It is simply A book along with one by GM Emms that seem natural to me to bring up (as a suggestion) when we get one of those frequent posts from someone who seems new to opening selection issues.

IM pfren wrote:

"(...a book with good intentions, and very bad content: titled 'openings for amateurs', and giving plenty of engine dumps which go well past move twenty, without any verbal or rational explanation- what a great thing to suggest to an amateur!), or it is just your alter ego? Do you really learn chess by reading engine dumps?"

I frequently encourage people to go to the Mongoose Press site to look at a sample from the book. Perhaps people can tell for themselves whether or not it is a book expecting people to "learn chess by reading engine dumps".

IM pfren wrote:

"Had I dared to publish such an 'openings for amateurs' travesty, I'm afraid FIDE would seriously consider stripping me of my FIDE Trainer title!"

Perhaps people will trust your decree, but they might wonder about that Soviet Chess Primer subject.

I see you still need "qualitative" explained. Oh well. I will answer with a quiz.

Without technique it is impossible to reach the top in chess, and therefore we all try to borrow from Capablanca his wonderful, subtle technique.

Do you know who said this?

Google it.

Pfren, the difference between the way Tal and Botvinnik approached a position was not "qualitative". The difference was one of thinking processes. Tal tended to work out long concrete variations while Botvinnik relied more on holistic strategic thinking. 

That's a real stylistic difference that isn't just a matter of quality.

I get the strong impression that if I were to quote you from six months ago, you would disagree with that statement and act as if the person making that statement was a moron.

Can you guess who is playing white? (maybe you know already).

How would you describe his "playing style" from that game?

IM pfren wrote:

"I see you still need 'qualitative' explained. Oh well. I will answer with a quiz."

I don't see any specific identification of what IM pfren is seeing and answering. I have asked about a clarification of what sort of "purely qualitative" differences, IM pfren perceives in the World champions starting from Alekhine. I imagine that people don't need further help from me about judging the accuracy of IM pfren's claimed seeing and the degree to which IM pfren is answering.

IM pfren wrote:

"Without technique it is impossible to reach the top in chess, and therefore we all try to borrow from Capablanca his wonderful, subtle technique.

Do you know who said this?

Google it."

If the quote expressed something that was in dispute, it might make sense to know who said it. However, I am aware of no such dispute.

Apparently you are hardly aware of anything.

jengaias may well be right claiming that you are here to promote commercial stuff. I will add that you are a very bad promoter.

Regards.

I did not write, "decide what is good or what is bad for them". I mentioned that perhaps people can tell for themselves whether or not Openings for Amateurs is a book expecting people to "learn chess by reading engine dumps". Perhaps people can go to the Mongoose Press site and judge for themselves the possible merit of that idea.

Does this "garbage" evaluation come from anything other than "an Internet patzer"?

Lots of people suggest books around here, and lots of people seem to want suggestions. If you want to try to put a stop to that, let me know when you feel yourself to be near success. I think that I try more than most to give people alternatives to advertising and to make people aware that a book is only possibly helpful.

I don't care about "damage" beliefs because someone proclaims them.

I have previously mentioned my ~1500 USCF rating. I suppose there are going to be those who regard that as not gaining "the slightest understanding about chess". As far as I know, there is no rating requirement for bringing up books here.

I don't try to convince people to buy books. In many of my posts, I do bring up possibilities out of a belief that it might be helpful, while not automatically trusting the claims of others about the supposedly obvious. I am not trying to "prove" helpfulness.

That is false.

They were about chesscafe, not specific reviews. Did jengaias ever look up the unfavorable review of the New in Chess book, Chess Opening Essentials, Vol. 1? ("I really cannot think of a group who could benefit very much from reading this book.")

Is it at all unexpected that New in Chess has publicized favorable reviews?

I don't try to sell anything. In addition to mentioning possible books, I have posted about other things, such as clarification of what sort of "purely qualitative" differences, IM pfren perceives in the World champions starting from Alekhine.

I am not "an employee with a mission here". Everyone can make their own judgment about this "worst moron ever" stuff.

Fried liver attack

IIRC this was Carlsen against... Svidler?

Carlsen-Gelfand I think

ruy lopez..... so easy to understand.

Just play some e4 line