Is there a list of all the moves Chess.com considers book moves? I know there's a vast literature out there, but I'm specifically curious about the list that Game Review uses to determine whether something is a book move.
No, there's no available list of what the Game Review process flags as book moves
Is there a list of all the moves Chess.com considers book moves? I know there's a vast literature out there, but I'm specifically curious about the list that Game Review uses to determine whether something is a book move.
I suspect that if you were going to print it out, you would have a multi volume set much like the old Encyclopaedia of Chess Openings (ECO).
It would be nice if chess com would offer such a list as pgn or ctg.
It would be nice if chess com would offer such a list as pgn or ctg.
It would be completely useless, wouldn't it? What chess.com considers a "book move" is very arbitrary. Some awful openings are on the list (Bongcloud, Wayward Queen) while some reasonable openings are not (Danish Gambit).
Check out Explorer. It'll tell you what opening moves are played most often. Those are book moves.
Check out Explorer. It'll tell you what opening moves are played most often. Those are book moves.
Explorer goes deeper than lines that are considered book moves in general and certainly on Game Review.
The concept of what chess.com calls a "book move" is useless for an uncountable number of reasons:
1) Already mentioned, chess.com is missing many moves. Are you even old enough to know where the term "book move" came from? Long before the internet, like the 1980s, there was the "Encyclopedia of Chess Openings" across 5 volumes, A thru E, each having 100 sections, 00 thru 99. Some opening lines went 10 to 12 moves deep while others went well into the 30s, like the Sicilian Dragon, Classical King's Indian, or French Winawer Poisoned Pawn. What chess.com calls a book move is a complete joke even compared to this source from the early 80s.
2) Whoopdi-freaking-doo-dah, chess.com calls it a book move. Do you understand it? Have you read an actual book written by a GM or IM that actually explains the whole point or ideas of said opening? If not, why should you care if it is called the English or French or Spanish or Dutch or even if there was an opening called the Dumb Dog Defense? Why does it matter? If you don't know what you are doing beyond that, it doesn't.
3) Whoever put together chess.com's encyclopedia was intoxicated when he did it. Many are completely mislabeled! For example, they list 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 as the "Sicilian Defense, French Variation". There is no such thing! It is merely the Sicilian Defense, the variation unknown at this time. 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 a6 is the Kan, 4...Nc6 is the Taimanov, 4...Nf6 5.Nc3 d6 is the Scheveningen while 5...Nc6 is the Four Knights Variation.
Chess.com is a place to play other humans online and there are many decent videos on endgames and tactics for beginners. The opening videos here are highly suspect, highly incomplete, and the encyclopedia on here is littered with errors. Better off studying books (plural) and possibly supplementing it with a chessbase video on the opening. Get different perspectives and learn different variations of the opening you are studying.
Trying to determine if your move is a "book move" or not based on some garbage-ridden mis-labelled hunk of junk full of errors is useless!
Is there a list of all the moves Chess.com considers book moves? I know there's a vast literature out there, but I'm specifically curious about the list that Game Review uses to determine whether something is a book move.