Why I HATE book openings
Sort:
Why must you blame your blunders on the opening book?
Why do you hate book openings? 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bc4 Be7 5.d3 O-O this all looks reasonable to me and your position looks fine. These moves could have been learned from a book, or played simply by opening principles.
6.h3 looks passive (since d6 hasn't been played). I checked whether this was book for some reason, but ChessBase says no. Why not develop with O-O?
7.Nxe5 would win a pawn. Black gets some positional compensation since you lose the bishop pair and have doubled pawns, but material is material. And this interesting imbalance will probably lead to a dynamic and fun game.
9.b4?? - This loses a piece. The simple 9.Bb3 Nxb3 10.axb3 wouldn't have lost any material. You would have doubled pawns, but also an open file, and positional considerations are usually secondary to material ones.
12.d4? - Who's guarding your e4 pawn?
15.Bxa5?? - Ouch! Walking into a killer discovered attack.
Update: I checked an opening reference and 4.Bb5 (Four Knights Games) and 4.d4 (Scotch Four Knights) are the main moves. That is *not* why you won or lost this game but this is worth considering if you play this opening in the future. :)
How far into this did you play by the book?
7. Bd5 might have been better. You still might lose the bishop, but if you do you take a knight and pressure the oponent's Bishop with your own knight. It looks like you spent too much time dancing with your Bishop instead of developing your pieces to control the center.
11. Nxe5? Was there a strategic point to this or am I missing something? Again you're dancing around with your oppenent. Black is developing while you're pieces are running. I assume it went downhill from there.
Well there are no book moves after move 4 , so it really has nothing to do with why you lost. 5. d4 looks stronger to me , you lost because you blundered your pieces.
You fell for a discovered attack. Memorize, or at least understand, the theory behind the Morphy defense as a response as black to 2. Nf3. Your opponent knew opening theory better than you, and as a result he was able to spring an attack as a result of his better position.
I know nothing on opening theory
Kingfisher wrote: I know nothing on opening theory
My point exactly. The key to chess is learning from your mistakes. Go learn.
Kingfisher> I know nothing on opening theory
Like you, I also try to avoid memorizing a bunch of variations. I seem to improve faster by spending time on tactics, endings, and strategy. I have spent time studying opening principles. That's why your sixth move sticks out. It's in violation of Rule #6/10: Move your king to safety at the side by castling King's-side (which also gets your Rook into play) and even Rule #1: Move pieces not pawns. It's great that you're playing stronger opponents... it's more painful, but you tend to learn faster that way. :)
likesforests wrote:
Kingfisher> I know nothing on opening theory
Like you, I also try to avoid memorizing a bunch of variations. I seem to improve faster by spending time on tactics, endings, and strategy. I have spent time studying opening principles. That's why your sixth move sticks out. It's in violation of Rule #6/10: Move your king to safety at the side by castling King's-side (which also gets your Rook into play) and even Rule #1: Move pieces not pawns. It's great that you're playing stronger opponents... it's more painful, but you tend to learn faster that way. :)
I also try not to memorize variations, but I do find it useful to know the major openings, and their suggested counters. If I know what an opponent plans to do, for example, if he plays the Sicilian Defense as black, I know he plans to move his knight to b6. That knowledge can be very useful around move 9 or so, as I can arrange my pieces in a way to neutralize his capabilities.
Unbeliever> I also try not to memorize variations, but I do find it useful...if I know what an opponent plans to do, for example, if he plays the Sicilian Defense as black, I know he plans to move his knight to b6.
Learning thematic moves and ideas is one of the more profitable ways to study openings! Wikipedia has a one-page intro to the Four Knights explaining its main secrets:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Knights_Game
With players <= USCF 1450, I often find that they miss at least one key tactical pattern (fork, pin, skewer) during a game. That usually proves decisive, and tends to make the small gains made from specialized opening knowledge less important.
The most important thing is to learn from your mistakes. Here, you should learn that castling is a really good thing, both taking your king to safety, AND getting your rook into play. In most of the games I play, I castle on the fourth move unless there's a pawn of my opponent hanging, or he has gotten his bishop out the wrong side so that I can win his rook. Aaaaaaaaaanyways, king safety is essential. That was my point.
~Amanda
Unbeliever wrote:
...If I know what an opponent plans to do, for example, if he plays the Sicilian Defense as black, I know he plans to move his knight to b6. That knowledge can be very useful around move 9 or so, as I can arrange my pieces in a way to neutralize his capabilities.
What in the world are you talking about? Earlier, you mentioned the Morphy defense after 2 Nf3, and now you're saying Nb6 in the Sicilian?
If my opponents regularly played Nb6 as Black in the Sicilian, I wouldn't be too worried about losing.
Never thought castling might be an idea? Does put your king to safety.
was in too much hurry
Feb 4, 2008
0
#19
I don't think you can blame your mistake on that opening. It's actually similar to a trap in a different opening.
Feb 4, 2008
0
#20
Kingfisher,
I don't think you should blame your blunders on your opening. I saw several major errors in your middlegame leading to your defeat. I only saw 1 thing in your opening:
4. Bc4
This is called the Italian Variation. Better are 4. Bb5 and 4. d4. Why? Because Black can play 4... Nxe4! Because if 5. Nxe4, 5... d5 forks the Bishop and Knight, and Black has a very good game.