Opening Theory, a Waste?

I have a question about studying openings in-depth.  I currently am using the dragon and like the Soltis variation in response to the 9. Bc4 line.  So I naturally study lines that come after the 12. h4 h5.

But what if my opponent plays, for example, 12. Kb1, 12. g4, or another move?  Then studying the Soltis is almost a waste of time?  Or must I study other moves just as much?  

Thanks

You should definitely create a repertoire for yourself by playing different openings, but I for one cannot memorize many openings, much less all of them. Studying positional play should help in getting through an opening played that you don't understand.

Dragon is a very intensive-theory opening choice.

So either you play it 'by ear', or you learn the lines, which includes lots of variations and sub-variations...

Depending on the player in question's level.

You are choosing an opening which is very complicated and if you do not know the theory of this opening--you will not do well. However if you spend too much time on this opening--the rest of your chess game will lag.

Next time pick an opening that does not require such a knowledge of that openings exact theory.

Joey made a fine post regarding this.

What should you do now? I am not sure.

Thank you.  I was under the impression that it was in my best interest to be prepared for anything my opponent would throw at me.  I guess I'll just stick to studying the main lines, but use general dragon middlegame strategies to combat White sidelines.

I don't think joeydvivre was suggesting I not play complex openings.  He was suggesting a better way to do it.

So is everyone here saying not to study the dragon because its too hard!?

There always comes a time that your knowledge of the theory stops and you have to play on your own.

This can either be on move 8 or if you are really have too much time on move 20 or 30.

Just start playing from their and analyze your own games. Learn your oponents plans learn your plans and read the theory where you felt you had a crappy position out of the opening,

By playing the same opening over and over you learn the standard plans and it becomes easier for you to react to unknown moves.

The problem with the dragon of course is that the opening and middlegame are complex and you will probably lose quite a few times before getting a good idea how to defend yourself. Also the knowledge is concrete so if a white player is fully booked on the dragon he might gain an advantage against a lesser prepared you (though you still get a playable position) But then your superiour knowledges of plans and defensives and offersive mechanisms will kick in

So by all means play the dragon but just be prepared for a steep learning curve

Are you referring to my terribly low blitz rating?

Because believe it or not, someone rated 1300 and playing the dragon is kind of a joke...  I'm more of an 1800 guy who bs's blitz and is studying the dragon more in-depth for a rating increase.  So why don't you stick to saying something helpful?

What follows is a summary of the Sicilian (Dragon/Soltis, Kan, Open, Najdorf,Najdorf/Scheveningen, Scheveningen, Sveshnikov, etc.) Everything except the Closed Sicilian, Rossolimo/Russian game, Grand Prix, Smith-Morra Accelerated Gambit Accepted/Declined, Smith-Morra Gambit Accepted/Declined (Alapin), c3 Sicilian, etc.

                              INCOMPLETE WILL EDITED 

Studying the Soltis at your level is the surest way to remain a patzer for very long. Leave it alone, and concentrate at other aspects of the game first (endgames, stategy, tactics). Else, you just accumulate absolutely useless knowledge (for the very simple reason that you don't really understand what you are reading).

Specifically to this opening, you should study the Soltis variation if you're serious about learning theory, because it is definitely black's best option here. With players like Karpov dominating with white, the Dragon was starting to seem almost refuted until Soltis popularized this line:

I think I have learned the hard way. I have still a long way to go to the master level. About 1/2 year ago I was studying the Najdorf and KID to move 23+. I have finally realized that NO ONE plays theory at my level. I am lucky if I can get someone to go down 10 moves in theory.

I am just been studying tactics lately because I have had more beneficial results to my game.

I would recommend you study some opening, stick to it, learn the ideas of the main lines, and learn the type of middlegame that arises. Good luck!

5M???

  Now that's a great "Summing Up."  Hope the right folks are listening.

What do you mean when you say 5.3M?

Wow, I can't believe I didn't realize.

Capablanca claimed to rarely to study chess, yet look at his amazing prowess on the board.