Forums

Does chess openings really matter if you will win or not?

CouldntFindAGoodUsername

Just curious to know...

Eros_Jasphine

The affect the game very much, not necessary but yes they do matter

Maria_Goldenberg

 To win a game with a opening you should know  a lot of theory and see all the powerful tactics…

CouldntFindAGoodUsername
Eros_Jasphine wrote:

The affect the game very much, not necessary but yes they do matter

Thanks for sharing your view

CouldntFindAGoodUsername
Maria_Goldenberg wrote:

 To win a game with a opening you should know  a lot of theory and see all the powerful tactics…

Okay thank you grin.png

Senpai_wizz

It does if you are a 2000 level player

Doesnt matter if, 1. you are > 1700 

                            2. you are < 2200

Maria_Goldenberg
CouldntFindAGoodUsername wrote:
Maria_Goldenberg wrote:

 To win a game with a opening you should know  a lot of theory and see all the powerful tactics…

Okay thank you

You are welcome 🙃

Senpai_wizz
Senpai_wizz wrote:

It does if you are a 2000 level player

Doesnt matter if, 1. you are > 1700 

                            2. you are < 2200

My opinion

CouldntFindAGoodUsername
Senpai_wizz wrote:
Senpai_wizz wrote:

It does if you are a 2000 level player

Doesnt matter if, 1. you are > 1700 

                            2. you are < 2200

My opinion

Thanks thumbup.png

OrphanGenerator

i've been thinking of making an experiment where i get 3 people who don't know the rules of chess to begin studying a specific part of the game, like 1 person the opening, 1 some middlegame tactics, and the last 1 some basic endgame principles to finally confirm if openings matter or not

CouldntFindAGoodUsername
OrphanGenerator wrote:

i've been thinking of making an experiment where i get 3 people who don't know the rules of chess to begin studying a specific part of the game, like 1 person the opening, 1 some middlegame tactics, and the last 1 some basic endgame principles to finally confirm if openings matter or not

Oh, that'd be helpful. You can share the result after the experiment!

OrphanGenerator
CouldntFindAGoodUsername wrote:
OrphanGenerator wrote:

i've been thinking of making an experiment where i get 3 people who don't know the rules of chess to begin studying a specific part of the game, like 1 person the opening, 1 some middlegame tactics, and the last 1 some basic endgame principles to finally confirm if openings matter or not

Oh, that'd be helpful. You can share the result after the experiment!

yeah, but i'd have to go outside and talk to people, so im not sure if im going to

CouldntFindAGoodUsername
OrphanGenerator wrote:

yeah, but i'd have to go outside and talk to people, so im not sure if im going to

Alright. Not a problem.

Spielkalb
Senpai_wizz wrote:

It does if you are a 2000 level player

Doesnt matter if, 1. you are > 1700 

                            2. you are < 2200

That statement is completely wrong in my humble opinion.  Handling the opening smartly gives you an advantage in the middle game. That's true independently to your rating.

It does matter that you understand 

  1. the basic principles, like take control of the centre, develop your pieces castle early etc. 
  2. the basic goals of different openings. What's the Sicilian defence aiming at?

That is not to confused with learning lines by heart, for which the statement of @Senpal is probably true.

RAU4ever

I have trouble understanding the question. Is the question: does studying the opening matter? Or: does knowing theory matter? Or: does the opening moves matter at all? 

Does the opening matter? Yes, of course. You can't play random moves in the opening and expect to win. 1. h4, 2. a4, 3. Rh3 is not a way to win games. 

Does studying theory matter? No, not really. If you play using sound opening principles, you can pretty much get through any opening fine. You might not get a small advantage (that is after all what theory aims to do with the white pieces), but even equal positions can easily be won still in the middlegame. You can easily see this in lower rated players' games: the games don't get decided by that small advantage white had out of the opening that was gradually increased to a winning advantage, the games are instead won by tactical oversights. 

We had a discussion in a different thread not too long ago as to  at which point theory will start to matter. I know I have broken through to 2200 playing 1. d4, 2. g3 and double financhettoing without learning the opening. I know someone else who's even worse at openings and got to 2300+. I think theory isn't necessary below 2000 rating and it can still be avoided above 2000, but it'll get harder.

CouldntFindAGoodUsername
RAU4ever wrote:

I have trouble understanding the question. Is the question: does studying the opening matter? Or: does knowing theory matter? Or: does the opening moves matter at all? 

Does the opening matter? Yes, of course. You can't play random moves in the opening and expect to win. 1. h4, 2. a4, 3. Rh3 is not a way to win games. 

Does studying theory matter? No, not really. If you play using sound opening principles, you can pretty much get through any opening fine. You might not get a small advantage (that is after all what theory aims to do with the white pieces), but even equal positions can easily be won still in the middlegame. You can easily see this in lower rated players' games: the games don't get decided by that small advantage white had out of the opening that was gradually increased to a winning advantage, the games are instead won by tactical oversights. 

We had a discussion in a different thread not too long ago as to  at which point theory will start to matter. I know I have broken through to 2200 playing 1. d4, 2. g3 and double financhettoing without learning the opening. I know someone else who's even worse at openings and got to 2300+. I think theory isn't necessary below 2000 rating and it can still be avoided above 2000, but it'll get harder.

Yeah, I meant the theory is required or not. Thanks !

Spielkalb

I think this question is so ambivalent answered because everyone has a different understanding what "opening theory" does exactly means.

CouldntFindAGoodUsername
Spielkalb wrote:

I think this question is so ambivalent answered because everyone has a different understanding what "opening theory" does exactly means.

That's indeed right

Spielkalb

Within this community it is often heard by GMs, IMs and such Don't waste your time with openings, train tactics!  That's a little lame advice because you need strategy to come into a position in which tactics can evolve.

@RAU4orever wrote: »Does studying theory matter? No, not really. If you play using sound opening principles, you can pretty much get through any opening fine. «

Without studying theory you can't possibly know what those "sound opening principles" are.

Stil1

I'd say:

Beginner: opening principles should be the main goal ... opening theory should not be considered at this stage.

Intermediate: opening principles are still important ... but a small bit of introductory theory can begin to help.

Advanced: opening principles and basic theory begin to mix together, each informing the other.

Expert: opening principles are considered less; theory starts to become more important.

Master: opening principles are only minimally considered. Most of the time, opening moves are guided by one's knowledge of theory, and/or individual home prep.