In this game we can see that a grandmaster is playing bad moves in the opening. And yet he is not lost anytime soon. In fact there are many situations in which he can get a worse but not dead lost position by playing ...e5 at some point. Also note the amount of time it takes for White to get his game-winning attack off.
In short, as long as you're not outright blundering in the opening (which obviously does occur at class level) you can do ok for some time.
Opening theory for d4 if played properly.
One should know at least 7-8 moves in for most openings you might see and at least have some knowledge of common opening traps so you don't get snared. At least you can get that far into a game with a relatively good position. I played someone rated more than 300 points higher than me in a tournament
, and they fell for Legal's Mate.
Indeed. Nobody is saying that it's "fruitless", but saying that at only a certain level of players should devote to openings amounts to the same thing.
To me, endgames are a sign of a mature player. To wrangle a draw out of a losing middlegame or taking advantage of your positional pluses accumulated does take proper care.
But one doesn't get from point B to point C without point A. Right? Is it not logic?
I believe Reti when he said, tactics are 99% of chess. But I also believe he wasn't just talking about the middlegame. There are tactics in the opening & in the endgame.
Indeed. Nobody is saying that it's "fruitless", but saying that at only a certain level of players should devote to openings amounts to the same thing.
...
But one doesn't get from point B to point C without point A. Right? Is it not logic?
...
At each level, there are more appropriate levels to study. Openings are something for every level, but how that is done and how much time is committed to opening study should likely differ.
That is why opening principles have been mentioned, especially at lower rating tiers. Also, playing over master-level games in openings played will help with ideas. But until a player is strong enough, most of their games will leave book in 4-6 moves (this holds true in most of my games at least) and likely out of most databases in 10.
Memorising reams of theory, while it can have some benefit, especially if a player has great retention and recall, isn't likely to provide as much benefit as working on other parts of the game. I know very few of my games are won or lost because I didn't know 10-12 moves of book but they are due to one side's miscalculation in a tactical or endgame position.
Most of my opening study came from correspondence games, post game analysis when I look at where we go out of book, and playing over games in the opening, not specifically trying to memorize lines.
Also, not everyone is the same, so some players can do well studying openings more deeply.
In my experience as a lower rated player, opening principles quickly brought me from 900 level play to 1000 play. After that, tactics got me to the 1100-1200 range, where I've hit a plateau just above 1200. I'm now studying a few specific openings and defenses in the hope that they can help me reach a plateau in the 1300 range. There is value in learning openings vs. opening theory, but certainly not in the first experiences with chess. Or at least, the marginal value is lower when one is first learning the principles of the game.
Indeed. All very good insights, from the experienced to the novice.
I agree with all of them.
I've been playing for over 30 years, my generation didn't have databases, chess.com, engines. But we made do with any books, tourney or clubs as well as our desire, to accumulate as much knowledge as possible. To hone our experience at the board.
To absorb.what was useful, discard what was not and ultimately add what was uniquely our own (Bruce Lee)
It was absolutely essential to study endgame, tactics & positional themes.
Go over Master games, study our own games & annotate as freshly as we could.
But our own personal Opening repertoire?
It may take a long time to establish one.
Super GM's these days have reached such a level, they no longer play out of the Opening.
Simply because they can now play anything.
Those of us mere mortals typically depend on Openings which we may take a lifetime to master, to carry us through.
Be that we excel in closed openings or romantic ones. We tend to be drawn to certain ones, trendy or not.
I'm espousing simply establishing, building a repertoire early. Experimenting, tweaking.
At any level. Because, to me, your choice of Openings often determines how you will play. Positionally or tactically. Drawish or aggressive.
Thanks
Everybody should play the london system. Just play 15 moves of bleeding edge LS-theory on autopilot.
As a real london system player you should also neglect your middle and endgame skills and fully concentrate on the opening like most LS-players do. Don't forget to play h3 and Bh2 in every game. It doesn't matter what your opponent plays. Just premove everything.
"... Overall, I would advise most players to stick to a fairly limited range of openings, and not to worry about learning too much by heart. ..." - FM Steve Giddins (2008)
"... the average player only needs to know a limited amount about the openings he plays. Providing he understands the main aims of the opening, a few typical plans and a handful of basic variations, that is enough. ..." - FM Steve Giddins (2008)
"... This book is the first volume in a series of manuals designed for players who are building the foundations of their chess knowledge. The reader will receive the necessary basic knowledge in six areas of the game - tactcs, positional play, strategy, the calculation of variations, the opening and the endgame. ... To make the book entertaining and varied, I have mixed up these different areas, ..." - GM Artur Yusupov
I agree. I've written a blog post about studying openings, and topics on technology used to study chess. ChessTech.info
... The problem with opening memorization is a positionally stronger player will have little difficulty undoing your advantage from a book line, ...
"... I feel that the main reasons to buy an opening book are to give a good overview of the opening, and to explain general plans and ideas. ..." - GM John Nunn (2006)
"... Review each of your games, identifying opening (and other) mistakes with the goal of not repeatedly making the same mistake. ... It is especially critical not to continually fall into opening traps – or even lines that result in difficult positions ..." - NM Dan Heisman (2007)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627062646/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman81.pdf
"... Every now and then someone advances the idea that one may gain success in chess by using shortcuts. 'Chess is 99% tactics' - proclaims one expert, suggesting that strategic understanding is overrated; 'Improvement in chess is all about opening knowledge' - declares another. A third self-appointed authority asserts that a thorough knowledge of endings is the key to becoming a master; while his expert-friend is puzzled by the mere thought that a player can achieve anything at all without championing pawn structures.
To me, such statements seem futile. You can't hope to gain mastery of any subject by specializing in only parts of it. ..." - FM Amatzia Avni (2008)