Do I need an "Opening Repertoire"?

Sort:
ThrillerFan
Justs99171 wrote:
jimmy_g_09 wrote:

If you are playing long time controls it would be crazy to not know which lines you prefer at the very least... I would suggest alekhine is a great choice as it is forcing, sound and rarely encountered. You will know it much better than your opponent and only in a small minority of your games will they play critical lines to move 10.

Study the lines a little bit... Play it in blitz... Check where you went wrong... You will get E4 nf6 on the board in 30% of your games and learn very fast! 

 

10 moves deep isn't very deep in the Alekhine. Remember, that knight gets moved two or three times before either side even start to move pieces off their back rank. By the time the position just looks 10 moves deep, in comparison to another opening, it's more like 20.

I learned the exchange variation fairly well before I started playing the Alekhine with black. You will run into players that know the line they are playing much better than you do. The thing is, you're having to learn every line and white is only having to learn one. Of course white is having to learn a line against every possible black defense, but that is idealistically. In reality, people neglect one area of study and over do it in another. So some people you will run into, and they know nothing about the Alekhine Defense, and then there is that one guy that knows nothing about the French but everything about the four pawns variation against the Alekhine Defense.

A lot of chess players choose a defense based on the false premise that their opponents won't know it as deep. The more and more you improve, and the better and better competition you play, the better and better they are with the white pieces.

I can remember playing a guy and he was beating me so badly in the Nimzo-Indian, I asked him if he was cheating. Of course he was angry, but the next game I switched to the Grunfeld and obliterated him … well, that answered that. He definitely wasn't cheating. I suspected that maybe he also plays the Nimzo and maybe that's how he knows so much. No … after checking his games in opening explorer. That was not the case. He must have just specialized in stomping the Nimzo-Indian Defense. Maybe his/her abusive step father played the Nimzo and he/she was on a life mission to trounce everybody that played it against him/her. Who knows? But the person was lower rated than me, didn't play the Nimzo with black, but knew the opening much better than me.

Some people just have an expert or chess master friend and playing against this friend will cause them to have to know specific lines very deep.

 

I don't play the Alekhine as Black, but as White, forget 2 or 3 times, most my games, the Knight moves the first 5 times or 5 of the first 6:

1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.c4 Nb6 4.c5 Nd5 5.Nc3 Nxc3 OR

1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.c4 Nb6 4.c5 Nd5 5.Bc4 e6 6.Nc3 Nxc3

 

Occasionally I get someone that doesn't take on c3.

llama44
PanchoPippin wrote:

 at the 1500 - 1600 level is it necessary to have multiple responses to say e4?

No.

 

 

PanchoPippin wrote:

I'm worried this approach may not work, as well because people will learn I play the Alekhine and prepare super well for it

First of all, you're not playing for the world championshp   not many will prepare for you, and those who do won't prepare a lot, so don't worry. It's more likely they will think, oh, I forgot the alekhine opening exists, I'll be sure I know a few moves before I go to my next tournament.

But also... this is how tournament chess works. You can't expect to surprise your opponents every game. You will inevitably face opponents who are not surprised by your openings. The better you get, the stronger your peers will be, so more and more they will be competent well rounded players. The goal of the opening is to get a middlegame position you enjoy. An opening isn't supposed to win the game for you.

 

 

PanchoPippin wrote:

Is there a way online to scout my openents who are USCF members to see their games

You can type their first and last name plus the word chess into google and sometimes that will give you games.

You can also buy databases like chessbase, although preparing for your opponent that way isn't very common U2200.

... and the effectiveness is questionable. In fact I knew one master who purposefully played his 2nd rate stuff when playing in certain tournaments where he knew his games would be published in these databases.

llama44

And while @thrillerfan gave good advice, maybe it's useful to point out that at a local tourney he would be one of the strongest players there. He also has decades of experience... my point is a deep and wide repertoire with strategy like playing one variation and then another isn't really possible for lower rated or new players.

llama44

And also... you'll find that you will sometimes lose to total garbage  (we all do)

And sometimes you'll get exactly what you prepared for, struggle in the middlegame, and lose (it happens to everyone).

The opening isn't as important as you may think. Things like good calculation habits and time management will decide more games than whether you knew what Caruana likes to play on move 15 of your pet line.

Justs99171
llama44 wrote:

And while @thrillerfan gave good advice, maybe it's useful to point out that at a local tourney he would be one of the strongest players there. He also has decades of experience... my point is a deep and wide repertoire with strategy like playing one variation and then another isn't really possible for lower rated or new players.

 

A player should learn to play double king pawn openings with black before learning any asymmetrical defense. From there, it would be great to learn your next defense very deep and thorough as a player should be moving on from 1.e4 e5 before they know it too deep. Occasionally, they should resort back to meeting 1.e4 with 1 … e5 ...

Learning Two Knights Defense and familiarizing your self with the tactical complications and miniature games is part of every self respecting chess players early development process, as a player, and just good education. If you don't know what the Evan's Gambit is, or the Moller Attack, why are you learning something like the Sicilian? A player should have some line against the Kings Gambit, Ruy Lopez, Vienna, Bishop's opening, and whatever else blah blah blah If someone doesn't know what the Danish Gambit is, how are they going to make any chess opening work with either color? You have to understand rapid development, tempo, king safety, etc., before moving onto baiting your opponent into overextending his pawn center … Assuming you're at an intermediate or advanced level before learning an asymmetrical defense against 1.e4, the asymmetrical defense should be the 2nd opening as a work in progress.

 

llama44

I think you use the word "should" too much. I think there are many ways of learning, and I don't think the exact order is so important.

Justs99171

llama44 wrote:

I think you use the word "should" too much. I think there are many ways of learning, and I don't think the exact order is so important.

 

I strongly disagree. There may or may not be a God, but I'm absolutely certain that someone SHOULD start learning chess by playing 1.e4 e5, with both black and white.

If anybody thinks other wise, I have no use for them in my life.

In fact, if you're teaching a small child how to move the pieces, and you don't soon teach them that 1.e4 e5 is the way to go, society should built a special prison for you. You should be kept away from all children. Even if they don't play chess.

llama44
Justs99171 wrote:

There may or may not be a God, but I'm absolutely certain that someone SHOULD start learning chess by playing 1.e4 e5

Well, I applaud your honesty. Not many people are so upfront about their pathology.

 

Justs99171 wrote:
if you're teaching a small child how to move the pieces, and you don't soon teach them that 1.e4 e5 is the way to go, society should built a special prison for you.

Yeah, again, I'm impressed you don't hide who you are.

PhilipFry3000

This is such a interesting topic for many reasons.  I believe the best way to start is play a few different openings so you can see some patterns and ideas.  From there you can choose the openings which suits your style best and begin focusing on the themes from those.  Beginners get lost in "memorizing" the book lines, which at the beginning level isn't as important as many think.  Understanding the reasons these are "book" lines is more useful.  When you play against higher rated players, they will often play out of "book" to make you actually play chess as opposed to the "memorized" lines.  Here its important not to panic, but just try to play moves which get you into a position you are comfortable with.  

 

I also agree you should absolutely start with 1. e4 e5 when you start learning chess and eventually incorporate new lines.

ThrillerFan
Justs99171 wrote:

llama44 wrote:

I think you use the word "should" too much. I think there are many ways of learning, and I don't think the exact order is so important.

 

I strongly disagree. There may or may not be a God, but I'm absolutely certain that someone SHOULD start learning chess by playing 1.e4 e5, with both black and white.

If anybody thinks other wise, I have no use for them in my life.

In fact, if you're teaching a small child how to move the pieces, and you don't soon teach them that 1.e4 e5 is the way to go, society should built a special prison for you. You should be kept away from all children. Even if they don't play chess.

 

Before I ever picked up a chess book, first thing I learned just from discussion with 2 other college students, both White and Black, was 1.d4 d5, not 1.e4 e5, from both sides.  Queen's Gambit.

 

In addition, against 1.e4, I basically experimented, and when I tried the different pawn structures, I was comfortable with 1...e6 and 2...d5, and asked if that opening had a name, and found out it was the French Defense.  I basically got there like a baby deciding for themselves if they are left or right handed!  That lead to my first opening book (after reading 3 other non-opening books - one on tactics, one on strategy, one on endgames) was "Winning With the French" by Uhlmann.

 

So I guess I'm useless since I didn't start with e4 e5 at all.  1.d4/2.c4 as White, QGD against 1.d4, French against 1.e4.  Now it's 1.e4 with an occasional 1.Nf3, 1.b4, or 1.c3, and then French and King's Indian as Black with an occasional Dutch.

Justs99171
ThrillerFan wrote:
Justs99171 wrote:

llama44 wrote:

I think you use the word "should" too much. I think there are many ways of learning, and I don't think the exact order is so important.

 

I strongly disagree. There may or may not be a God, but I'm absolutely certain that someone SHOULD start learning chess by playing 1.e4 e5, with both black and white.

If anybody thinks other wise, I have no use for them in my life.

In fact, if you're teaching a small child how to move the pieces, and you don't soon teach them that 1.e4 e5 is the way to go, society should built a special prison for you. You should be kept away from all children. Even if they don't play chess.

 

Before I ever picked up a chess book, first thing I learned just from discussion with 2 other college students, both White and Black, was 1.d4 d5, not 1.e4 e5, from both sides.  Queen's Gambit.

 

In addition, against 1.e4, I basically experimented, and when I tried the different pawn structures, I was comfortable with 1...e6 and 2...d5, and asked if that opening had a name, and found out it was the French Defense.  I basically got there like a baby deciding for themselves if they are left or right handed!  That lead to my first opening book (after reading 3 other non-opening books - one on tactics, one on strategy, one on endgames) was "Winning With the French" by Uhlmann.

 

So I guess I'm useless since I didn't start with e4 e5 at all.  1.d4/2.c4 as White, QGD against 1.d4, French against 1.e4.  Now it's 1.e4 with an occasional 1.Nf3, 1.b4, or 1.c3, and then French and King's Indian as Black with an occasional Dutch.

 

I specifically said if you think otherwise, then I have no use for you. It's not your fault you're a wild Indian in need of the savior. Even left handed babies can make it to heaven.

So long as you're not teaching small children QGD, flank openings, and asymmetrical defenses, I wouldn't put you in prison.

TROOLLFACE

https://youtu.be/FcNeEapxr0w Although you might already know the cambridge springs trap.

Justs99171
TROOLLFACE wrote:

https://youtu.be/FcNeEapxr0w Although you might already know the cambridge springs trap.

 

What's up TROOLLFACE … you showed up just when I was in need of backup.

TROOLLFACE

like what kind of backup?

Justs99171

Just reread everything and I'm sure you can help.

TROOLLFACE

how?

 

Justs99171
TROOLLFACE wrote:

how?

 

 

Are you a real troll or a fraud?

TROOLLFACE

idk

TROOLLFACE

I see what you meant

 

jimmy_g_09

I am surprised you guys are disagreeing with me... Well I'm not really cos it's a forum. But anyway... 

1. Alekhine is decidedly rare and at 1500 level very few white players will have deep knowledge. You will see 2.nc3 and d3 a lot I bet.

2. The forcing lines like thrillers C4 C5 stuff and four pawns etc are less testing than the exchange and the modern variations which will lead to a space advantage for white but is very manageable

3. This view people will out prepare you is a bit of a paradox... If people prepare deeply and catch you out then you learn something new and that's good for your development

To the question of do you need another defense at this level the answer is simply no... I only really diversified openings after 1700ish... MVL still plays najdorf and grunfeld every game for goodness sake. Obviously on the other hand magnus has a super diverse repertoire... Maybe theyll play a match soon  

I would say play it and study it til you get bored of it... Then move onto something new. The most important thing is to enjoy the game and keep improving. That's the winning long term strategy.

I agree that learning E4 e5 at some point will help your development too.