Development degree of an opening

This is related to my previous topic:

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/quickest-development-games-with-7-moves

Let's consider 10 moves as the main benchmark of the opening theory. We say that the opening has perfect development if all figures (bishops, knights and queen)  are developped, the king is castled and rooks are connected. Notice that it also requires, at least, 2 pawn moves in order to develop bishops.

A perfectly developped opening has the development degree devdeg = 8/8 (8 for white and 8 for black). Any imperfectness diminishes the degree by 1.

Example: B90 Sicilian Defense: Najdorf Variation, English Attack

Here devdeg = 7/7 cuz white has an undevelopped LSB and black has the undevelopped queen.

#1
I do not understand your way of counting about rooks.
In your diagram Rh1 and Bf1 are on their initial squares and because of Bf1, rooks are not connected. Ra8 is on its initial square and because of Qd8, rooks are not connected.
So that would be 6/6.

How would you count this?

If U develop the LSB from f1, the rooks will be automatically connected. So, I'd say devdeg = 7/7, that is, only 1 move is necessary until the full development. 😎

I'd say devdeg = 8/7 (so far,  I didn't count rook moves as developments). However, I see your point (the move 10...Rc8 on the open c-file looks like a real development). 😎

We could change the count, if U propose a clear rule for rook moves. 😉

Fin! But what is the point in this score? A 3/3 opening must be just as good as an 8/8.

Ok, but the score 8/3 means that white (with 5 additional development tempi) will certainly win! So, it's the difference in development points/tempi which is really important. 😎

Hi, Yigor, long time. Openings where one side develops more rapidly usually feature material imbalances. What about move 10 of this (known to be bad play from both sides, but useful for this question) line of the Double Muzio?: 

Hi, bro! 10. Be3 is clearly a developping move giving devdeg = 7/3 (4 additional tempi). It almost compensates white's material losses. 😎

Development is only one of the factors that needs to be taken into account, and not necessarily the most important.

Here's an example, from the opening... my opponent was an FM.

White is obviously playing for a big mating attack on the K-side. What is Black's best move?

What would you play as Black in reply to White's aggressive opening? A developing move? You'd probably end up getting mated.

I played 10. ... Ne8 (heading for d6).

Stockfish agrees... the N(f6)-e8-d6 plan is correct, and already Black is better.

#5
"We could change the count, if U propose a clear rule for rook moves."
++ Point is that 10...Rc8 is considered a better move than 10...Qa5, though that would be more developing per your count.
One way would be to count the number of pieces on their starting squares and count 8 minus that.
Even so, in the position #3 we can consider Rh1 as developed on its starting square as it supports h2-h4-h5.

Nice, it's clear enough! We cant take it as a definition.  😎

As U underligned it, the only exception (where devdeg = 8 instead of 7) should be the case when all pieces are already developped except for a rook that has already an optimal position on its starting square, like in your example #3 (where devdeg = 8 for white and 7 for black).

#12
How would you count this? 5/5?

Ra1 is somewhat developed at its starting square as it supports the intended pawn advance on the queen's wing, like a4. Ra8 is somewhat developed at its starting square as it supports the intended defence on the queen's wing, like pawn move a5.
Bc8 is somewhat developed on its starting square, as it will leap to h3 given the opportunity.
Bc1 is somewhat developed on its starting square, as it would hinder on other squares.
Qd8 is best where she is: she waits to go Qh4 if given the opportunity.
Qd1 is best where she is: she would hinder on other squares.

#12
And this? 6/3?

I agree with your counts. 😎

"Somewhat developped" doesn't concerns bishops, knights and the queen. They should be truly developped outside of the first row.

#15
How would you count this after 10 moves: 7/4?
https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1084375 

Yes, for me black bishops are undevelopped (though they changed their initial positions on the 8th row).

It's great, in an idealized way, to develop your pieces as efficiently as you can.

But some lines require that you adjust. Modern theory is littered with openings where the best path is to neglect development, while pursuing other positional (or tactical) goals.

So yes, it's good to think "develop rapidly!", as a general opening strategy. Especially for beginning players.

But the strategy should be abandoned, if the position calls for something else.

Don't let a self-imposed rule become a shackle. Otherwise, you'll just be playing on autopilot, without thinking, and missing potential opportunities (or pitfalls).

Ordinarily, you want to develop quickly.

But one characteristic that separates the expert player from the average player is the ability to understand what the word "Ordinarily" means.

In your Najdorf English attack example, White does not want to move the bishop from f1, yet.  Yes, he could play Be2 or Bc4 at some point to finish development, but notice it has a good amount of scope right where it is, and is ready to trade itself for a knight that lands on c4 (which happens in many lines).

This is an attempt to simply looking at development, but the reality of chess is not so simple.