its hmm not just a line. Its a book. that I can highly recommend. safest siclian by chess stars. Even if you dont play it the book is great because he describes plans and ideas and moves without overwhelming you. Makes you feel like a master once you read even the quick repertiore chapters. I feel like I am getting a private lesson from a GM.
Easiest opening to learn for beginners ..
Sort:
Oh, I just meant the hedgehog trap (unless an entire book was dedicated to such traps?).
NachtWulf wrote:
Helzeth wrote:
Oh, it's one of my main books (I do play the taimanov after all!). It's just... Putting the hedgehog in the hands of a 1200 player is insanity. Every sub 1800 player I've been up against that used the hedgehog has fallen for the rc1 nd5 trick with a black knight on c6 and queen on c7.
Also, the line delchev recommends for his quick rep vs english attack is a poor line which commits the king to the kingside too early. The mainline is far superior.
I know this is a bit off-topic, but... would you please share a line, or show a diagram? Just wanting to learn, here...
Sure. I'm sure there are some flaws with the move order, I'm only throwing the move order in to get to the position. It's a theme well worth remembering, I've beaten a 2000er with it.
ugh, so tired. The knight is fine on d7* of course >_>
(I made a diagram last page)
jetfighter13 wrote:
I follow a meathod somewhat to the below
Your method is correct.
Advising a newbie to play g3 indian systems is equivalent to putting a new driver to the cockpit of a Formula 1.
May 25, 2012
0
#168
MDOC777 wrote:
aljay007 wrote:
i was always told to just stick to the oppening principles instead of memorising specific oppenings untill i get to a serious level rather i should focus on endgame and strategy, would you agree with that?
I would.
That's what I did.
Michael-G wrote:
IMO, I don't think that is the right method.The reason is that before you learn to play, let's say Dutch, you have first to learn to play Queen's Gambit.If you don't , you will have a huge gap in your education that eventually will kick in.
A junior chessplayer is like a kid.If you want him to be "strong" you have to "feed" him correctly and not let him "eat" what he likes.Later when he can judge , he can decide about his "food" but at his first steps he has to be guided closely because the point is not to understand an opening.The point is to understand chess, that is what many forget(I'm talking generally).
But that's assuming they will only pick one or two openings and stick to them, thereby learning nothing about the game as a whole. In my experience they experiment with different things, thus slowly gaining a more general understanding. I would argue that to understand the QGD is no closer to understanding chess than understanding the Dutch is to understanding chess.
madhacker wrote:
Michael-G wrote:
IMO, I don't think that is the right method.The reason is that before you learn to play, let's say Dutch, you have first to learn to play Queen's Gambit.If you don't , you will have a huge gap in your education that eventually will kick in.
A junior chessplayer is like a kid.If you want him to be "strong" you have to "feed" him correctly and not let him "eat" what he likes.Later when he can judge , he can decide about his "food" but at his first steps he has to be guided closely because the point is not to understand an opening.The point is to understand chess, that is what many forget(I'm talking generally).
But that's assuming they will only pick one or two openings and stick to them, thereby learning nothing about the game as a whole. In my experience they experiment with different things, thus slowly gaining a more general understanding. I would argue that to understand the QGD is no closer to understanding chess than understanding the Dutch is to understanding chess.
If you realy think that a beginner should start from Dutch then stop teaching and go back to school(If you really care for your students).
May 25, 2012
0
#171
Michael-G,
You really create the impression that you consider anyone who does not share your point of view an idiot. This way you are not going to convince a lot of people.
Sred
You are very confused.I don't care in convincing anyone, I never did.
There are openings that are more important than other openings.Not because they are better but because they lead to very important positions.It is very important for a beginner to learn how to play with, let's say, isolated pawn(and against it).If he starts from Dutch , after 3 years he won't know that.Every teacher that doesn't know that, can't teach , simple as that.He is not an idiot , he simply can't teach.
In articles repeatedly published in Shakhmaty v USSR , 64 and Shakhmaty Bulletin , Botvinnik , Suetin and Boleslavsky consider 1.e4 e5(for open positions) , 1.d4 d5(Botvinnik considers the positions from 1.d4 d5 semi -open although many books refer to them as closed) and 1.e4 e6(for closed positions and pawn structure understanding) as the main openings that will help any beginner to understand chess.More specifically Ruy Lopez , Queen's Gambit and French defense are considered the cornerstones of any beginner's chess education because they help him learn and understand most of the vital aspects of chess.Dutch belongs to the category of openings that no one should play until his basic chess training is complete and his level of understanding is on a satisfactory level.
Sorry for being rude but again I will trust Botvinnik and I will say to anyone that doesn't agree with him to go back to school.
I will repeat that I don't care to convince anyone.It will be for your own good if you are convinced but you seem to care more for the protocol.I don't , I never did.
There are some truths that no one say.We let beginners think that they can do anything they want.That they can study openings , that they can start from Dutch or Sicilian Najdorf.Nothing is less true than that.
I will repeat that beginners are like kids.You don't let kids eat what they want.You learn them to eat correctly and when they grow up they can choose their food.No beginner has the ability of choosing anything , he has to be under continuous guidance.
In the meantime you keep up with the protocol.By the way , I am wearing a tie , I hope I am correctly dressed.If not please forgive me.Next time I will rent a tuxedo.
May 25, 2012
0
#173
Ok Micheal G, I actualy hate symetrical positions as Black, because white can force a break to his own advantage, I will admit that e5 is in my rep as Black, but I do play the Dutch because it's fun, and I don't have to play the stonewall, I mainly play Classical, sometimes Lenningrad, its a much more tactical opening (atleast according to its reputation) than the QG.
May 25, 2012
0
#174
Michael-G wrote:
Sred
You are very confused.
I stopped reading here. What is it that makes peple lose their manners in discussions on the internet?
No need to answer, I'm out anyway.
jetfighter13 wrote:
Ok Micheal G, I actualy hate symetrical positions as Black, because white can force a break to his own advantage, I will admit that e5 is in my rep as Black, but I do play the Dutch because it's fun, and I don't have to play the stonewall, I mainly play Classical, sometimes Lenningrad, its a much more tactical opening (atleast according to its reputation) than the QG.
Fine by me.
Michael-G wrote:.
If you realy think that a beginner should start from Dutch then stop teaching and go back to school(If you really care for your students).
I never said that. I said a coach should be fairly open-minded about what openings his students play.
madhacker wrote:
Michael-G wrote:.
If you realy think that a beginner should start from Dutch then stop teaching and go back to school(If you really care for your students).
I never said that. I said a coach should be fairly open-minded about what openings his students play.
Then it's my mistake , I apologise for the misunderstanding.
I really like that idea, thanks for sharing. I use the Maroczy Bind some of the time against the Sicilian (sometimes in the Moscow, and against the hyper-accelerated dragon as well). I guess I never realized the potential explosiveness behind all of the compressed pieces!
May 25, 2012
0
#179
pfren wrote:
Advising a newbie to play g3 indian systems is equivalent to putting a new driver to the cockpit of a Formula 1.
Absolutely correct!
May 25, 2012
0
#180
Michael-G wrote:
The fact that you teach 35 years doesn't mean you do it right.
I have met a lot that teach even more and do it the wrong way.
The fact that Botvinnik agrees with pfren and considers opening completely useless for beginners gives us 2 controversial conclusions:
1)Either you are right or
2)Botvinnik is right
What do you think?
#1.) I think you are trolling and trying to start trouble, and I am not interested in that.
#2.) I think when you have 35 years of teaching experience ... are a chess Master ... and have some of the same credentials and writing awards that I have ... I might consider listening to you or taking you seriously.
Oh, it's one of my main books (I do play the taimanov after all!). It's just... Putting the hedgehog in the hands of a 1200 player is insanity. Every sub 1800 player I've been up against that used the hedgehog has fallen for the rc1 nd5 trick with a black knight on c6 and queen on c7.
Also, the line delchev recommends for his quick rep vs english attack is a poor line which commits the king to the kingside too early. The mainline is far superior.
I know this is a bit off-topic, but... would you please share a line, or show a diagram? Just wanting to learn, here...