One thing to also consider, most beginners, if given the chance, won't spot the tactic that wins a minor piece or a pawn or two in the opening. So this 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 theory just doesn't really hold water in my book. but you can believe what you want.
Deconstructing "Openings don't matter"
Sort:
Dec 17, 2022
0
#43
The goal for any beginner definitely, rather than study the opening, would be to drastically diminish the amount of times they leave pieces to be taken and attempt to always try and capture hanging pieces their opponents leave for them.
There has been a formula made to treat this epidemic, but most people deem the guy who wrote this stuff obsolete, so most of his stuff, is "lost knowledge." Thats why people like you, come up, and try and say, "Openings matter!" Yes they do, but to a certain extent. Generally they don't matter in the context of two beginners 1500 and below. I don't buy your 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 oversimplification for a second.
Yes openings matter, but they don't!?!?!
Answer that riddle, and you will solve chess, and become a millionaire.
What matters in openings is the logical developing of pieces and maybe setting some positional goal, what you want to achieve.
Principles is what is important. But what opening it is, or the exact variation of it, isn't so important, because sooner or later you will have to play on your own. So yes, it's part of being good in chess, but mechanical memorizing variations is similar as a knowlage without the kontext. You need to know, why you play, what you play.
Dec 17, 2022
0
#47
understanding piece values & interactions along with increasing board awareness of tactical patterns would reduce their blunders. 🙂
Openings of course matter, as does the middlegame and endgame.
The advice, of not studying the opening, is commonly given so that people don't spend time on long theoretical lines when at the same time they lack in other areas.
Openings do matter, but what matters more than getting a theoretical +=, is to calculate well, to know Endgames etc. After all a theoretical += can easily be spoiled 2-3 moves down the line if one can't play the position well.
Familiarity with thematic plans, trades etc of the openings you play is however needed, as is familiarity with those concrete lines where one is completely busted unless they walk a very narrow path ( one can also choose a repertoire where they minimise the number of lines they need to know by heart ). Beyond that, time and effort is better spent in other areas.
I will also say this. There are too many openings. Sure, one can be ill prepared in certain openings and lose material in the opening phase, but that is the intention of the feedback loop. You try and improve the negative of not knowing that paticular opening so that next time you won't fall for that. That's how one gets better. Not by developing an opening repertoire, but, by learning general principles, and tactics, tactics, tactics, and then strategy, among other things.
In my opinion, one would get more bang for their buck if they studied 2000 annotated master games in the span of 1 year, then studying opening theory for most openings in that same time frame.