My biggest regret to date in chess is that I didn’t play classical openings when I was starting out.
An IM told me I shouldn't play the Catalan unless you are 2300
Sort:
Nov 19, 2017
0
#22
Play what you want to play, but understand that there’s a reason for the advice you are given.
My biggest regret to date in chess is that I didn’t play classical openings when I was starting out.
My biggest regret to date in chess is that I didn’t play classical openings when I was starting out.
robbie_1969 έγραψε:
'haha this has nothing to do with Catalan since move 1' - greekgift_221b
The Catalan is a chess opening where White adopts a combination of the Queen's Gambit and Réti Opening: White plays d4 and c4 and fianchettoes the white bishop on g2;
Perhaps you have your own definition of the Catalan? One that is not entirely known to the rest of the chess world?
He is right.
Re-read "your" definition of the Catalan (which is not totally correct, but anyway!), and if you still can't see why he is right, then there is something wrong with your reasoning.
In that particular game, a Black pawn NEVER appeared at d5, so there isn't even the slightest hint of a QGD.
pfren wrote:
robbie_1969 έγραψε:
'haha this has nothing to do with Catalan since move 1' - greekgift_221b
The Catalan is a chess opening where White adopts a combination of the Queen's Gambit and Réti Opening: White plays d4 and c4 and fianchettoes the white bishop on g2;
Perhaps you have your own definition of the Catalan? One that is not entirely known to the rest of the chess world?
He is right.
Re-read "your" definition of the Catalan (which is not totally correct, but anyway!), and if you still can't see why he is right, then there is something wrong with your reasoning.
In that particular game, a Black pawn NEVER appeared at d5, so there isn't even the slightest hint of a QGD.
Is the pawn structure from a white perspective the Catalan pawn structure? Pawns on c4, d4 and g3? I would say so, but I am just a patzer. Its not my definition, its Wikipedias, perhaps we should contact them?
Leave it Robbie....
You don't understand what you talking about. The names of openings and lines from the move 2 and up are defined from both players moves not only Whites or Blacks doing. The Catalan is an opening that arrives by definition ( ask Tartakower ) from two move orders :1,d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.g3 and 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3
Everything else is not Catalan except the transpositions from the English-Reti opening. The game posted in 8# its a Kings Indian Defense Fianchetto variation.
Nov 19, 2017
0
#26
Robbie, the pawn structure of almost every opening depends not only on White's pawns, but Black's as well.
By robbie's reasoning, I suppose 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Nf3 b6 4 g3 should be a Catalan as well.
Nov 19, 2017
0
#28
Depends on your style.
Also rating does not determine your true strength.
It is anecdotal but I just played it quickly against myself playing both sides and came to the conclusion that black can equalise or get an advantage in the late middle game without doing anything fancy especially if White is passive. It is clearly a much harder opening than I thought with tough positional considerations.
SmyslovFan wrote:
Robbie, the pawn structure of almost every opening depends not only on White's pawns, but Black's as well.
gee you don't say, how inspiring. 
Bishop_g5 wrote:
Leave it Robbie....
You don't understand what you talking about. The names of openings and lines from the move 2 and up are defined from both players moves not only Whites or Blacks doing. The Catalan is an opening that arrives by definition ( ask Tartakower ) from two move orders :1,d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.g3 and 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.g3
Everything else is not Catalan except the transpositions from the English-Reti opening. The game posted in 8# its a Kings Indian Defense Fianchetto variation.
another person with a marvelous proclivity for stating the obvious, Is the pawn structure from whites perspective a Catalan pawn structure or is it not, out with it, I wanna here you say it.
m_n0 wrote:
By robbie's reasoning, I suppose 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 Nf3 b6 4 g3 should be a Catalan as well.
By your reasoning the English opening 1.c4 really isn't the English opening at all because of its transpositional possibilities. It should be called the Australian opening or the Outer Mongolian opening.
ok fine you mamas boys have it your way the game that I posted is technically the so called g3 Kings Indian. Happy now? 
Nov 19, 2017
0
#34
Bishop_g5 wrote:
First of all, you didn't explain to us, what is your level of understanding the Catalan!? Did you read some theoretical books? Do you try to reach some certain positions? and if so which of them?
the problem is that you will continue to play a " bad habits " chess and when you will face someone stronger you will not know what to do!!
In conclusion, your statement " from the moment my opponents don't understand my positional mistakes why should not play it? " doesn't match with your ambition to become better at chess.
Well, my feeling is that I don't understand the Catalan that well. I've watched a few videos and studied the variations with game explorer and my computer to find some common ideas and plans. I've def found some lines I don't like (esp when dxc4 comes in and you let black hold on to it)
I mean, I get what you are saying about playing "bad habits" chess, but I do make it a point to analyze every game I play and find at least one improvement to the opening i can learn from each game. So if I make a bad positional mistake and my opponent doesn't find it, hopefully I will discover it in my analysis (using book moves and the engine).. of course I fear I'm not good enough to always find the right answer or right improvements, but I don't let that keep me from trying. 
Thanks for your insights! I think i saw that double pawn sacrifice line before and I had no idea what was going on..haha I mean, if perfect play leads to lines like that then I can see why 1500 players shouldn't take it on.
Nov 19, 2017
0
#35
Well, my feeling is that I don't understand the Catalan that well. I've watched a few videos and studied the variations with game explorer and my computer to find some common ideas and plans. I've def found some lines I don't like "(esp when dxc4 comes in and you let black hold on to it)"
you can play Qa4+ right away so black can't hold on to the pawn
Nov 19, 2017
0
#36
Optimissed wrote:
Well, is or is not the IM an idiot? That is the question.
haha well I certainly don't think he's an idiot and I actually have a great deal of respect for him! I suspect he's right on, but I'm a chess player so I don't want to blindly follow his advice so I'm seeking to understand the reasoning behind the suggestion. It's mysterious to me, but there's all kinds of good comments in this thread that has given me a lot to think about. I do realize I have much to learn so I'm open to do just that; learn. And i figure if I don't take advice from IM's then I'm not being a very good student to the game.
Nov 19, 2017
0
#37
I've attended lectures by John Donaldson. He's one of the few IMs/GMs who makes time for low rated tnmt players. He is an excellent coach with a long list of credentials.
He was giving free advice. Take it for what it's worth. Or ignore it. He will still be an excellent coach who gives excellent advice. I think he's right about the Catalan, as do many others.
Remember, before Kramnik reinvented it, the Catalan was a poor sideline variation that didn't have much of a following. And that was after Tal and other great players from the 60s won some good games with it. The opening is the epitome of an esoteric, difficult opening.
But yes, anyone can play any opening and win a few games.
Nov 19, 2017
0
#38
MidnasLament wrote:
I was at a chess lecture a few months ago with IM Donaldson. I really enjoyed his insights and his stories on working with the US Olympiad team. Well, sometime during that lecture he mentioned the Catalan, one of my fav openings as white! And he basically said.. the Catalan is a very complex opening and unless you are 2300 you should not play it.
I was like... oh...
And I really did consider trashing it. Although learning a whole new opening can be an ordeal ya know?
But then I looked at my score with it, and I score fairly well with it.. and my thought was... well, maybe the opening is way too complex for me to understand at a high level, but why do I need to play it correctly? My opponants are 1400-1600 like me... Don't I just need to know it and understand it better than them?
And so I've stuck with it. My chess coach is about 1900 and he plays it as well. He doesn't seem to think its too complex... so that being said, it gives me positions i'm comfortable with and I'm still playing it.
But dismissing the advice of an IM doesn't sit right with me either.
I've also heard IM John Bartholomew say similar things about the Nimzo Indian. He basically says if you are a lower rated player you shouldn't play it. I understand these lines are complex, have many pawn structures to learn, and might be too hard for a lower rated player to really understand.. but again, do you really need to? Don't you just need to know it better than your opponant? And even if you don't, don't you need to play it in order to get better?
I dunno, I'm wondering how others feel about this, esp you stronger players! (and esp if you play the Catalan). I'm still willing to give it up if that's really the right thing, but I want to be really sure.
Thanks in advance. -Stacia
I always attend Donaldson's lectures in Reno. The guy knows his stuff, and has the credentials to back it up. AS far as some openings nor being "playable" at sertain levels, i agree to some extent. I have bene playing a line of the Benko Gambit that is "busted" at the IM/GM level, but it works at my level, so why change? If an opening works for you then stick with it.
Nov 19, 2017
0
#39
I think that any advice from an IM has to be taken in perspective. These are players who take the game seriously and are very good. They probably think that your time is better spent on things that are slightly above your level than things that are way above your level. In general, they're right. If you seriously want to improve, their advice is worth considering.
However, for a run-of-the-mill player like myself, I'm just looking for something that will confuse players at my level. The fact that I don't know the nuances of an opening is not that important because my opponent doesn't know them either. So, I try different openings just to see what happens. If it works I continue to use it. When it quits working, I switch to something else.
Nov 19, 2017
0
#40
woton wrote:
I think that any advice from an IM has to be taken in perspective. These are players who take the game seriously and are very good. They probably think that your time is better spent on things that are slightly above your level than things that are way above your level. In general, they're right. If you seriously want to improve, their advice is worth considering.
However, for a run-of-the-mill player like myself, I'm just looking for something that will confuse players at my level. The fact that I don't know the nuances of an opening is not that important because my opponent doesn't know them either. So, I try different openings just to see what happens. If it works I continue to use it. When it quits working, I switch to something else.
Here's a piece of advice I give my students:
Don't play a move you don't understand.
EVERY opening is potentially very complex, so my guess is that Donaldson isn't saying you can't win most of your games with the Catalan or Nimzo-Indian, but that he thinks you would win a higher percentage with different openings.
When I was coaching a high school club and team, who often saw 1 e4 e5 in tournaments, I considered getting them hooked on the King's Gambit as White, but thought that the complexity and the lack of clear middlegame plans didn't fit players in the 700-1400 OTB range.
So I taught them the Bishop's Opening, which often transposes to a favorable position for White in the King's Gambit Declined and often develops with clear middlegame plans like get in an early f4, then O-O-O, then Pawn Storm Black's O-O King. At the time (1990's), that Opening had been out of favor for 60 years, there were few books about it, and our opponents didn't know it. We rode it all the way the three straight county championships in our state's most competitive county and 3rd-4th-5th state championship trophies in those years. If we had tried to bite-off openings and strategies that were above the players heads, we would never have achieved that.
That doesn't mean Donaldson is right. If you play any opening long enough, you gain much more understanding of what it can do than almost all your opponents.