If you are prepared in it no
Is max lange an useless opening?
Sort:
Ok, it's very tactical. The best advice would be to decide based on either its currnet theoretical state (where does it stand in the best hands?) or it's practical implications (does it win against most opponents if you know it well and they don't?).
You decide from there.
p.s. I gave kind of a non answer. when I say "currnet theoretical state" I mean soundness.
My preference is just to play the best opening as far as I can discern and I will win anyway if I'm the better player. no need for a specific opening regime even if that will give quick results.
I have some mistake in this line:1.e4 e5 2.nf3 nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.bc4 nf6 5.o-o nxe4 6.re1 d5 7.bxe5 Qxe5 8.nc3 Qa5 9.nxe4 be6 10.ng5 o-o-o11.nxe6 fxe612.rxe6 bd6 13.bg5 rde8 14.qe2
ShirovStyle wrote:
Heres an old fun one that shows shat happens if black doesn't know his ish:
thx for your help
Mar 31, 2011
0
#6
It's probably fine if you're using it OTB in live chess. In Correspondence Chess it's probably not so swell if your opponent has access to opening books and/or Data Bases. Even openings like the Latvian Counter-Gambit tend to work against opponents who don't know how to deal with them.
ShirovStyle wrote:
Keep in mind 15)...Qe5 was a blunder that lost the queen. Well known thoery suggests that the paradoxical ...Qd5 is correct. After that it's still a battle as far as I know
no i dont think so.Qe5 is correct.when white did f4? black should play d3 and then Qd5I analysise with fritz:-+(-1.44)good for black.when black play qd5 white plays fxg7 and after Rg8 white plays Nf6+-(+5.81)good for white
DafyddTheIgnorant wrote:
yes it is.
you should play the ruy lopez which is pretty much a forced win for white
but ruy lopez have many lines and i like to that my opponent be surprised.i played lopez last year of course
DafyddTheIgnorant wrote:
yes it is.
you should play the ruy lopez which is pretty much a forced win for white
The Ruy Lopez is certainly not a forced win for white, and many of the lines are easier to play as Black. If you are not a master you would be well advised to avoid it.
At the higher levels, Max Lange tends to lead to draws. At the lower levels, you will probably not get it on the board as the opponents will deviate intentionally or unintentionally. So, I'd say that it's not terribly useful practically.
Still, if you are interested in it, might be nice to learn even if you don't get to use it too often.
All of the openings are useless. I have not yet seen a single opening that guarantees a winning advantage. What's the point of learning an opening if it can't even get you an advantage. They're all rubbish.
No, it is not a useless opening, but instead of castling so quick I think playing c3 is a good alternative.
@Loomis
Certainly there aren't any openings which guaruntee a victory. If there was wouldn't that defeat the point of chess? The idea is that if you know more than your opponent, you can come out of the opening with a strong position or ahead on material.
Then your opponent just learns a little bit more and all your work is for nothing. What a waste of time.
I think the problem with the Max Lange is not that the opponents will learn more, but that most will avoid it. (Unless it's a thematic tourney in correspondence)
Apr 1, 2011
0
#16
Openings are merely a way to get to a playable middlegame with equality as a worst-case. (For White, perhaps retain the initial advantage he had to begin the game with!). Nothing more!
Stop deluding yourselves by thinking otherwise!
Openings DO NOT:
- Win you material. (You need help/mistakes from your opponent.)
- let you "come out ahead with a strong position". (You need help/mistakes from your opponent.)
- Get you dates with foxy women. (You need help ... period)
They DO:
- Allow you to leverage the work of Masters for hundreds of years in figuring out what a good move to play in a certain position would be.
- Save you a ton of time from having to work things out on the board both accurately and time-efficiently assuming you and your opponent are still "in book".
- While learning the moves, there is this naive hope that you will actually give a damn and learn the ideas about playing with the pawn structures the opening presents and what the plans for each of the pieces usually are. This is vital and allows you to play "thematically" even when your opponent deviates early.
Sure, there are ALWAYS lines where "not knowing the theory" can be like walking through a field filled with landmines ... but I've noticed that as you play stronger opposition, you are ALWAYS going to run into people who know the stuff as well, if not better than you do.
You might as well play something fun that you're comfortable with. At the club levels, any opening is sound as long you can back it up with tactically safe play.
Atos wrote:
I think the problem with the Max Lange is not that the opponents will learn more, but that most will avoid it. (Unless it's a thematic tourney in correspondence)
You get to the Max Lange more often if you use the Scotch Gambit.
As long as you're below 2200-2400 ELO you can play any opening you want to and win. It's pretty much irrelevant at our level.
Loomis wrote:
All of the openings are useless. I have not yet seen a single opening that guarantees a winning advantage. What's the point of learning an opening if it can't even get you an advantage. They're all rubbish.
but i think if u dont know any opening you maybe have some mistakes with black
give me a good advice