Around your level I was playing French and Queen's Gambit. I totally get you man. I have improved to about 1321 USCF (And rising... Hopefully) with attention to the opening. One of the key things I did was get a book on Openings. I still have it, it's called "Winning Chess Openings" by Yasser Seirawan. He basically goes over a lot of openings in depth with lines. From that, I chose Italian and Sicilian (Sometimes I play Pirc in more... serious games) And Gruenfield. I went to my coach and he suggested some lines for me and Bam! I was doing a whole lot better in my OTB games. Another area of improvement instead of flattening out that helped me a lot is plain tactics. I have had 2 accounts with premium before this one and done over 10,000 tactics on here and on another site. It's a ridiculous amount I know, but it helps. I also would watch channels like Agadmator and others for the strategical and tactical ideas that he said were there in the game and try to apply them in my own game.
Thoughts About Improving w/Openings?
Thank you for the thoughtful response. I have ordered the book "Openings for Amateurs," as it has come highly recommended in some previous posts in this forum, but I will also take a look at those which you've recommended.
I've actually had a dalliance with chess for many years: I purchased a couple of Jeremy Silman's books about 15-20 years ago, and used to play frequently with a couple of friends, but looking back I was probably around a 500-800 player and didn't get much out of the Silman books. It's only been recently that I've decided to take improvement seriously and went through the Lesson Plan on this site. Man, what an improvement just within a couple of months. I feel like I just see the board totally differently. It's hard to explain, but I'm guessing it has something to do with pattern-recognition.
My current rating in the lessons is between 1300-1400 -- still not great, I know, but I started basically from scratch and have worked through to the "Master's" lessons. I've played some tactics, but still have trouble with those; it's funny: I can solve the occasional problem in "Tactics" on the first try, but then some totally stump me.
I wouldn't pay attention to lessons rating, It really doesn't show much. There's a kid on here that told me he was better than me because he had 2,000 Lessons and I mopped the floor with him. I did skim through "Openings for amateurs" Book I never read it in depth because I play Italian, it doesn't really need super high amounts of study, just a few traps to watch for and don't try fried liver unless you are playing a total noob.
In your area of tactics, a lot of people will tell you (Myself included) that they incredibly help your game, because they do! Without them you can miss mate in 3's, 4's, 5's, miss a hanging piece and loose! They teach you pattern recognition, above all. Which really helps.
Another area (if you aren't doing it already) Is don't play super fast blitz. I am guilty of it, and it really makes you more frustrated than do anything for you. Long classical games will allow for improvement of calculation.
Thanks again -- all great advice. Yes, I've tried some shorter timed games and only ended up getting frustrated. Daily Chess is more my speed right now.
You could try playing the Reti/Kings Indian Attack with white pieces. It goes with moves Nf3, g3, Bg2, O-O. It's not the strongest opening white has available, but it's super simple and it completely avoids all the pitfalls in the opening for a beginner. There are no 4 moves that could give black a real advantage, you end up having your kingside developed, your king safe and castled and you have a lot of options to continue after. Best part about the opening is that you can always play it, since there is nothing your opponent can do that could force you to play something else. So it really is an opening that goes together with everything. After that you have a full game of real chess ahead of you, where your opponent has to rely on playing actual chess to beat you, instead of just memorizing some opening trap and going with it every time.
Here is an example how a game could start, if black plays accurately:
According to Stockfish 8, this position is pretty much equal, with a very slight edge for white if he goes d4 right away to strike at the center. I know that higher rated players would frown upon an opening that gives black equality in 4 moves, but that is not really the point here. The point is that this opening is superbly easy to play, you can force it in every game, you avoid all the typical opening pitfalls and you get a position where you get to practice chess in proper games. Of course if opponent plays something slow or develops stupidly, you can even start with a nice advantage from move 5.
Thank you, Taskinen -- that does look useful. I especially like that you get *some* control over the center (although not from the typical d and e pawns) and that you can both fianchetto and castle within four moves. I'll give it a shot!
Thank you, Taskinen -- that does look useful. I especially like that you get *some* control over the center (although not from the typical d and e pawns and that you can both fianchetto and castle within four moves. I'll give it a shot!
Grandmaster Yasser Seirawan also suggests King's Indian Attack as one of the best openings for a beginner in his book Winning Chess Openings for the same reason that it's very solid, safe and versatile opening. It can be played by beginners, club players or even grandmasters alike. If you are more interested, this is an example of a setup white would like to have in King's Indian Attack:
Here you have the options to play rook to e-file, make a battery, playing Qe2 or even going double-fianchetto with your dark squared bishop. This is of course just one way to play the opening and all of it depends on how the game continues.
To be honest with you at your level it is more useful to study endgames and middlegames than go into openings
To be honest with you at your level it is more useful to study endgames and middlegames than go into openings
I see what you're saying, as middle- and endgames represent real tactical play whereas openings sometimes become rote/automatic, but part of my problem with playing the Sicilian was that it set me up for middlegame positions that I wasn't comfortable with, whereas the Four Knights/Ruy Lopez lines ended up with very solid positioning that I was able to better exploit.
Granted, if I was better with tactics, I'd be able to play the middle-game that results from the Sicilian opening better...
For what it's worth, my rating also plumetted after using the Sicilian. I played it because it was called the Dragon, and I was a kid and kids loved dragons... and beyond that, I didn't know anything about the opening.
And really, that's the problem. An opening is more than just just the first moves. An opening is an entire cluster of ideas. When Black plays c5, he is saying, "I'm fighting for the centre with a flank pawn. ...c5 doesn't help with my development, but I'm willing to accept less space and less immediate activity for a better central structure (2 central pawns vs White's one after an eventual d4) and chances to counter-attack." With this, there comes typical motifs, plans and tactics. In the Ruy Lopez, for instance, White often castles, plays Re1 and then fights for the centre with c3 and d4. The Sicilian has its own similar ideas that repeat time and time again, as does every opening.
The 'secret' to getting better at different openings is thus to deeply understand them: what are you trying to do? Where do you pieces want to go? What is your long-term plan? What are your typical maneuvers? What threats must you watch out for? If you can confidently answer all these questions, then you will do very well. It's also why learning an opening is so much more involved than just picking up a book and memorizing the first 10 or so moves. It requires thought on your part.
Personally, I would recommend worrying less about openings and more about becoming a better chess player as a whole. If you have an hour to spend on chess, then spend most of that time on tactics or endgames or playing through Morphy's games, and use only a few minutes on openings. And what you should focus on is general opening play: development, castling, not moving the same piece twice, etc. Openings are fun, for sure, but they are the chess equivalent of sugar; you don't want to do it too much.
I'm also a noob but I agree FWIW with SmithyQ that at our level it doesn't matter that much which opening you play. You'll likely win more games by concentrating most of your valuable study time on tactics, endgames and to a lesser extent, the middlegame. A book which is very often mentioned when seeking to understand opening principles in general (which is more important really at our level than understanding one specific opening in depth) is this book by GM Emms:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Discovering-Chess-Openings-Building-Principles/dp/1857444191/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1529341845&sr=8-1&keywords=chess+openings+emms
I also agree with Taskinen that the KIA is a good opening to play if you don't want to have to memorise a lot of moves, and it gets your king to safety early if you play it in the right sequence. There is a chess.com group called KIA Inc. - might be worth joining up?
Good luck!
Thank you again for all your thoughtful responses. I take your advice to heart and I will shift my focus more toward tactics and endgame theory, while still learning what I can about how certain openings lead into specific types of middlegames.
c5? Run away! Hide! play a defense as white from move 1. Sicilian too much theory, you will lose.
e5? Lots of theory! Run ! Hide!
e4? Lots of theory! Run! Hide! No e4.
... "Winning Chess Openings" by Yasser Seirawan. ...
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627132508/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen173.pdf
Grandmaster Yasser Seirawan also suggests King's Indian Attack as one of the best openings for a beginner in his book Winning Chess Openings for the same reason that it's very solid, safe and versatile opening. It can be played by beginners, club players or even grandmasters alike. If you are more interested, this is an example of a setup white would like to have in King's Indian Attack:
Here you have the options to play rook to e-file, make a battery, playing Qe2 or even going double-fianchetto with your dark squared bishop. This is of course just one way to play the opening and all of it depends on how the game continues.
One word of caution regarding the KIA (and it goes for all system openings: London, Colle, Torre, Modern/Pirc):
The idea behind these openings is that your pieces go to specific places that are (usually) fairly safe, and the move order you use to accomplish getting your pieces to those places does not often matter much. This leads to a tendency for players to play the opening on autopilot (i.e. "I'll play these moves and then I'll start thinking about what I want to do ..."), and experienced opponents will often try to throw a wrench in your plan and force you out of your comfort zone. Note that generally these are not refutations of the system, but rather moves designed to get you into a middle game position that you are less comfortable with so you are more likely to make a critical error.
While I agree with your point about playing moves on auto-pilot, it's also worth noting that the recommendation to play KIA was for complete beginners, who often get trapped already in the opening. Opponents on that level are not really capable of forcing a middle-game position they are more comfortable in. The whole point is that beginners get beyond move 5 without already having blundered a piece to an opening trap. The better you get the more you need to be aware of the positions the openings lead to, for beginners if you can play 4 moves accurately in the opening, you are very much likely already in a better position than your opponent is. It makes it much more enjoyable to continue playing, if you are not getting stomped right out of the gate.
Thank you again for all your thoughtful responses. I take your advice to heart and I will shift my focus more toward tactics and endgame theory, while still learning what I can about how certain openings lead into specific types of middlegames.
It is common response here to "forget about openings" and "study endgame" instead, but I don't think there is any real reason not to look up at least one reasonable opening for both white and black, where you know the first few moves (and at least the basic ideas behind them). That way you can actually get to a middle-game and maybe eventually even endgame, and can put those skills you have practiced in use. Openings like four knights, KIA or London system will already get you far, if you know the basics.
I do agree that there is not much point in practicing deeply into some openings, trying to memorize the critical lines. Just get the first few moves in and then you have couple pawns and pieces on the play, which will help you to identify where the rest of your pawns and pieces want to go.
Thank you, Taskinen -- that does look useful. I especially like that you get *some* control over the center (although not from the typical d and e pawns) and that you can both fianchetto and castle within four moves. I'll give it a shot!
The King's Indian Attack is sometimes suggested as a sort of quick-fix opening solution for near-beginners, but notice the reservations that IM Watson had while mentioning the idea.
"... For players with very limited experience, I recommend using openings in which the play can be clarified at an early stage, often with a degree of simplification. To accomplish this safely will take a little study, because you will have to get used to playing wiith open lines for both sides' pieces, but you can't eliminate risk entirely in the opening anyway. ... teachers all over the world suggest that inexperienced players begin with 1 e4. ... You will undoubtedly see the reply 1 ... e5 most often when playing at or near a beginner's level, ... After 2 Nf3, 2 ... Nc6 will occur in the bulk of your games. ... I recommend taking up the classical and instructive move 3 Bc4 at an early stage. Then, against 3 ... Bc5, it's thematic to try to establish the ideal centre by 4 c3 and 5 d4; after that, things can get complicated enough that you need to take a look at some theory and learn the basics; ... Of course, you can also play 1 d4 ... A solid and more-or-less universal set-up is 2 Nf3 and 3 Bf4, followed in most cases by 4 e3, 5 Be2 and 6 0-0. I'd rather see my students fight their way through open positions instead; however, if you're not getting out of the opening alive after 1 e4, this method of playing 1 d4 deserves consideration. ... a commonly suggested 'easy' repertoire for White with 1 Nf3 and the King's indian Attack ... doesn't lead to an open game or one with a clear plan for White. Furthermore, it encourages mechanical play. Similarly, teachers sometimes recommend the Colle System ..., which can also be played too automatically, and usually doesn't lead to an open position. For true beginners, the King's Indian Attack and Colle System have the benefit of offering a safe position that nearly guarantees passage to some kind of playable middlegame; they may be a reasonable alternative if other openings are too intimidating. But having gained even a small amount of experience, you really should switch to more open and less automatic play." - IM John Watson in a section of his 2010 book, Mastering the Chess Openings, Volume 4
The KIA is discussed in Winning Chess Openings by GM Yasser Seirawan (1999).
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627132508/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen173.pdf
For more on the KIA, one could try The King's Indian Attack: Move by Move by Grandmaster Neil McDonald (2014).
https://www.newinchess.com/media/wysiwyg/product_pdf/7277.pdf
Perhaps, it would be of interest to look at Starting Out: King's Indian Attack by John Emms (2005).
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627034051/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen81.pdf
... playing through Morphy's games, ...
A First Book of Morphy by Frisco Del Rosario
https://www.chess.com/blog/Chessmo/review-a-first-book-of-morphy
"... Each player should choose an opening that attracts him. Some players are looking for a gambit as White, others for Black gambits. Many players that are starting out (or have bad memories) want to avoid mainstream systems, others want dynamic openings, and others want calm positional pathways. It’s all about personal taste and personal need.
For example, if you feel you’re poor at tactics you can choose a quiet positional opening (trying to hide from your weakness and just play chess), or seek more dynamic openings that engender lots of tactics and sacrifices (this might lead to more losses but, over time, will improve your tactical skills and make you stronger)." - IM Jeremy Silman (January 28, 2016)
https://www.chess.com/article/view/opening-questions-and-a-dream-mate
Good morning,
Although I've been a member on Chess.com for a couple years, I've only begun seriously playing about six months ago. Since then, I've found the lessons very helpful, and I've seen my ranking improve from 500 to between 1050 and 1100, where I have seemingly plateaued, at least for the time being. I know that's not very good compared with the average user on this site, but I'm happy with the progression I've seen so far.
Part of the improvement, I think, has been that I've played so much with the standard 1.e4, e5 opening variations -- Four Knights, Three Knights, Ruy Lopez, etc. -- that I've gotten pretty good, at least against players around my ranking who don't seem to be "married" to one particular opening. Wanting to branch out a bit so that I can learn more about opening theory, I've decided to spice things up by playing the Sicilian as black... and pretty much got creamed in game after game after game, watching my ranking take a hit in the process.
Now, I don't care too much about the ranking -- I'm fine with it taking a hit if it means that I'm becoming a more versatile player -- but I'm not seeing the same progression of improvement with the Sicilian as I am with the variants listed above. I know it's seen as a more tactical and "sharper" position, and I know that there are a lot of complexities (open vs. closed, etc.), but I feel somewhat stymied by trying something new, and I actually think my overall play has suffered a bit for it.
So: I know that's a lot of background info, but I felt that the context was important for what I'm about to ask: do you have any tips in terms of how to improve opening play without the rest of your game suffering? I guess I could play Four Knights or Ruy Lopez until I die, but how do I know if that's the opening system that fits my style of play best if I don't try others? Other than just working at them and being patient as I go through them one at a time, are there any tips you could give to a guy who wants to become stronger with openings?