Opening theory and engines haven’t “ruined” the game. Sure, grandmasters memorize tons of theory and endgame techniques, but they are GRANDMASTERS. They memorize all of that as they are the best chess players in the world, so they will do anything to get better. Since they already have built up the intuition for coming up with plans in the opening and middlegame, the theory doesn’t mess them up. All of these long opening lines are just there because people want to have specific ways to start out the game that give the biggest advantage, if you know what you’re doing. Key words: if you know what you’re doing. Sure, these points would make sense if we didn’t know the standard game plans in those positions, but we do. If we didn’t, then you would be right, as you would get an advantage, but you wouldn’t be able to use it, effectively rendering all of the time spent learning theory useless. However, these massive bodies of opening theory actually have points in the positions, so we know what to do. This makes the theory actually helpful, as we can get into positions we are more comfortable with, and know what to do if they play other moves than normal, like g6 in the Italian, or Qf6 in the Ruy, etc. To summarize, grandmasters use opening theory, endgame techniques, as well as the ideas in all of the positions to get a slight competitive edge, as they are all competing to be the best in the world. It’s like being a top sprinter, and wearing the newest and best running shoes to go a bit faster.
Also, a similar thing can be applied to intermediate and beginner players. In my opinion, intermediate and beginner players should know a few moves of opening theory, mainly so they don’t accidentally get a completely lost position in the opening. However, as many people have said, it is much better to learn tactics and gain more positional intuition than to waste your time on learning 20+ moves of theory. Unless you’re a grandmaster, you only need to know a few moves of theory, just come up with the rest as you go. As the original poster has stated, you should know how to play in unfamiliar positions, as if you only know how to play in very specific theoretical positions, chances are that your opponent will play a bad move that wasn’t taught in the opening course you got, as they expected you to be a 2500 who knows how to punish that move, and instead of doing that, you miss the point that their move had and lose the game. Practicing your positional intuition is much more important than learning openings, as GothamChess has said, saying that you could buy a course, get a +5 position in the opening, then hang mate in one because you don’t know what you’re doing. Still, I remain adamant that lower-rated players should know a little bit of opening theory.
I also feel like lower-rated players should learn a bit about endgame technique. Not to the extent at which grandmasters study them, but just to know the main ways to improve at their intuitive endgame skills. For example, one of the most important things, keeping away the opponent’s king by using opposition, or winning a rook and pawn vs rook endgame by slowly edging up the board and preventing all defensive opportunities. I don’t care for all the Lucena or Philidor or Whatever-his-name-was positions. You don’t need them until a much higher rung on the rating ladder. All you need is some good intuition (built up with practice) and some knowledge of techniques.
In conclusion, I feel that beginners should know some opening theory. But only some. Too much can mess you up, as you’re probably not even going to get all the main lines anyways. Instead, you should learn a few lines of theory, but focus mainly on the ideas in the positions, and what you game plan should be. In the long run, better intuition is going to help you more than 50 moves of theory in some random opening. I feel this thread has gone too far, with people saying that it is awful to learn theory and you should never play openings. The game has not been “ruined” by theory, in fact I fell it has been enriched. It’s fine if you don’t agree with what I think, this is just my opinion on the subject. Thank you.
tl;dr
Chess is a game where you use your head. You choose your moves. It builds your skill, and you get better. That’s the way it as played since the game existed. Then, engines came along. Modern grandmasters don’t even think for themselves. Most grandmaster games are just the result of memorizing piles of theory and engine analysis and then working through an endgame, until they enter a position which has been pre-solved by- you guessed it- an engine. An absolute beginner who just learned how to move the pieces uses more brainpower than these sleep-deprived zombies. Bobby Fischer was right. Prodigies which have so much potential are overshadowed by those who study with engines and opening theory. If they do prevail, they became slave to this new social construct, and lose all of their prodigal traits because they just play off of an engine.
Now, we have established that the professional field of chess has been completely corrupted by engines to the point where half of the entire game is dictated by engines. But now, it’s seeping into the beginner level. Scumbags like GothamChess are encouraging beginners to play the opening off of theory. Why? Why not just play the opening off of principles? You are a beginner. Playing off of basics is the best you can do. Opening theory is encouraging you to abandon your intuition and repeat engine moves. This is a bad habit disguised as a revolutionizing opportunity and everyone’s falling for it.
Solving the game of chess is removing the beauty of the game. The game was so much more fascinating in the 1800’s, where even top players made mistakes, blundered, and made a beautiful, revolutionizing comeback. Now, almost everything is a forced draw at the top level. It must be torturous to play at the top level.
Even I used to be a slave to this opening theory BS. Clearly, I am no longer.
Drop your Ruy Lopez, drop your Sicilian. Play whatever builds your skill. Players now take months to barely improve because they won’t build their intuition and skill. They waste their time memorizing openings instead of simply using their opening’s ideas and utilize tactical and positional concepts instead. You can simplify your chess. You just have to do it right.
tl;dr
i will steal your liver