FREE - In Google Play
FREE - in Win Phone Store
The problem is not that people study too much opening theory, it's that they just memorize lines without understanding the ideas behind.
If you want to get better at chess, do study opening theory, but try to understand the concepts rather than the lines. I started playing sicilian dragon because I somehow liked it when I got into more serious chess, and I learnt enormously because the concepts behind the opening are very straightforward. Then when I started to play other sicilian variation, or sicilian defense with white, I was very accurate, because I knew the most important stuff.
I would say, don't go into memorization for the sake of it, but specialize in some openings and read good books about them. The starting out guides are very good.
Playing without any knowledge of the theory, different unsound stuff every game, as a lot of people do, is the best way to suck for ever.
I totally agree, if you just memorize openings, it will only help you for one side. For example, if I just memorize the French, I will only be able to play for black, that's obvious. However, if I learn the concepts, I will be able to counter whatever white throws against me. Also, if I'm playing white against the French, knowing the concepts will help me because I can anticipate what Black will want to do.
Could you have just wait till we got past 50. Now we do not have anything to talk about. lol. Now will come a new topic slowly but surely.
I think its really good practice to study openning theory so as to learn the middlegame, the pawn structures, general strategy according to positions that arise.If one only studies variations and variations without much thought I agree I don't agree at all with some people that say you shouldn't study openning theory until you are 1800-2000 rated played.
I also think it is good to gain familiarity with some openings that you like and want to play on a regular basis. After playing 100+ games in the Ruy Lopez or Queen's Gambit, for example, you'll start to get better in those openings.
Well i have to say i have changed my mind. I have a couple of Openings i play that are down right brutal for my openent if they are not famaliar with them. If get to set it in say 3-4 moves they are in trouble and better not just be aware of it but prepare for it or the are the walking dead.
That goes the same way playing against certain openings. I know understand the situation and how the pieces work together. Tic, tic tic. If your not prepared for the opening ok but be prepared for that type of opening.
To sum it up do not be obsessed with "The Opening" be obsessed with the type of openings you play and against in chess. If your oppponent manages to win a pawn early in the opening that may be all they need to win the game.
u shud at least no da first 5 movves or somehtin so u no how to set up ur pieece nd wat works nd stuff...
You should know at least the first 5 letters of each word you type.
What you list above ain't English, Spanish, French, Russian, Portuguese, Chinese, or even Jibberish. It's "sh*ttish".
In terms of the criticality of knowing openings, that starts happening around 1800 to 2000. Before that, what you need to understand are opening concepts, not reams of opening lines.
Even if you are a 1400 player that knows the first 25 moves of the main line of the 6.Bg5 Najdorf, what are you going to do when your 1400 opponent deviates, because surely the vast majority of 1400s don't know 25 moves of Najdorf theory. Do you "understand" the point behind each of those 25 moves? Can you whip out the busts to each of White's deviations? Or do you just know the first 25 moves of the 6.Bg5 Najdorf from memory with no real clue as to the reason behind them? There's even a point behind 5...a6 in the Najdorf besides just giving it the label "Najdorf".
A lower rated player does need to understand opening concepts, but not specific lines of openings. As long as they know to control the center, develop your minor pieces first, your knights towards the center since they are short range pieces, don't move a piece more than once unless you are forced to (e.g. Opponent attacks your piece with a pawn), get your King to safety, connect your rooks, etc, they'll be fine.
You start reaching about 1800, and especially by 2000, then you need to start working on openings. You reach 2400 or 2500, and yes, you truly do need to know 25 moves of Najdorf theory and the reason why each sideline is comparitively worse to the 25 move main line.
Me and a friend had this same discussion the other day; we both admitted to studying the opening much more then we should, and I was reminded of a recent article in 'Chess Life', a book review for 'Amateur to IM' by IM Jonathan Hawkins. In an interview, the reviewer, Howard Goldowsky, asked Mr. Hawkins the popular question regarding how class players should divide their training time. Quoted from IM Hawkins' reply: "Don't fall into the trap of convincing yourself that once you organize your openings completely, then you will move on to other areas of study. That day will never come...In terms of memorizing variations, especially (for players rated) below about 2000, I would tone (opening study) way down, maybe 10% of your study time or less."
Mr. Hawkins then went on to suggest about 20% of study be given to tactics and analysis (which I take to mean solving diagrams etc), and the 70% bulk of our time be spent studying a combination of master games, our own games, and endgames.
When I first began playing chess, I made the mistake of blaming my losses on openings. I reasoned that if I learned a few openings, I would not lose so fast. How wrong I was! It was not openings that got me, it was tactics, tactics, tactics. The vulnerable f-pawn. Knight forks on the c pawns. Exploitation of pins. Thats how I lost most of my early games, not because I didn't know how to play the Ruy Lopez or Sicilian.
As I matured as a player and became more tactically alert, my complete void of endgame knowledge revealed itself to me. Once most of the pieces came off the board, I discovered that my king was a wandering idiot. Many games against stronger opponents were lost (even though I was equal or better) because of my ignorance in this area. So I intend to check out IM Hawkins' book. Hope some of my ramblings here were relevant or helpful! :)
That's why I, as someone who doesn't like learn anything about openings, won't walk into some ridiculous lines like the poisoned pawn najdorf or some nuts slav line that extends into the endgame... so I guess you have to know openings enough to know what not to get into heh.
It's good to know one opening, and practice it really good so you can counter every move than the opponent throws at you. It's also handy to know some defenses against the most popular white openings (King's+Queen's Gambit, KIA, English, and more). Just my opinion and this is normally what I do when preparing for openings.
Attack his ability to spell says more about you than him/her. As we are able to get the point in that comment. Ahhh check your spelling genious --> "comparitively " this how to spell it---> comparatively. And you managed to maybe insult 5 nationalities at the same time. Great job!
Your way wrong when it comes to the ability to understand an opening does not happen till you reach 1800. When i was 1300-1400 here i beat some strong players talking smack with some rarely seen club openings.
When i started working on openings more is when my playing ability improved. Correction, when i started learning similar types of openings is when i started winning more constantly. A player around 1400 must also have the other ingredient to improving with openings. With their study and practice about the opening they need to play with it more. As nothing will improve a player faster then experience using it. Preparation and Confidence are you allies when playing openings and planless moves, wishful thinking your opponent does not see the error in that move are your enemies.
Are you joking by mentioning a 1400 player and the Sicilian(Najdorf) in the same paragraph. The Sicilian has to be the most heavy in theory of all the openings. I have seen 2100 players in Vote Chess struggle with it at times against the opponent.
Soon as you learn how to master the basics of moving the pieces you need to start learning an opening. Correction, that really applies to playing online. Might be able to get away playing with your friends without learning an opening for a period of time. Start off with the Ruy Lopez is what many coaches recommend.
royalbishop, I don't even want to start spell/grammar checking that post... :-p
I already did it. The point here is to talk about ideas not English 101. As long as we can figure out what your saying it is fine.
When playing online i start off with learning the first 5 moves as my opponent does not know what i know or not know. I even played one the first time with knowing having understanding of the opening at all and won my first 3 games with it.
When playing in a online tournament i play either 1 opening or several openings that are similar as to give my opponents something to think about if they decide to look over my games to find my favorite. Having 2-3 Openings hand gives you options against opponents. I love to transpose from one opening to another.
Just relized who you are. You challenged me in a thread to a game and i refused get over it.
Noticed Online Chess- 2037, Chess - Blitz 2159, Chess - Bullet 2003 and Live Chess - Standard 1884.
Sound like somebody that used to play Vote Chess here.
I really don't understand why you posted my rating statistics twice...
Look through my online games, you'll see why I dropped 100 points in just a couple of sleepless days :)
Don't be obsessed with studying openings!! They are only 0.33 of the game. Study ALL of chess. My analogy would be, somebody who says to you, "I like to read biographies, but I always stop when the person reaches the age of 25."