FREE - In Google Play
FREE - in Win Phone Store
This discussion is becoming fairly philosophical. My attitude is that you should never tell anyone that they can't do something unless it is dangerous, illegal, or adversely impacts others. Other than that, let them try. Does it really hurt someone if they try an opening that is too advanced for them and they fail?
Ah, that's were you're going to.
Well, it's a game. It hurts no one to hang some pieces around for that matter. Maybe some weak egos, nothing more.
Now you cross the street. IMs are serious about chess, professionals aiming at results using the shortest amount of time and effort. Coaches in particular, because their living is measured by the success in their trainees in terms of results over time. It was like a guide asked about a trek, and he says its too difficult for older people. Would you say he is discriminating older people, or just sharing his evaluations and experiences?
Now, we're getting into the nuances of public speaking (I'm using the term loosely). The language and topics that I would present to a general audience would be far different from the language and topics that I would present to a group of experts. In the case of an IM, are they dealing with a group of advanced players who have dreams of becoming IMs and GMs, or, are they dealing with a diverse group of players who just want to improve? The techniques and discipline will vary depending on the group.
Well, he was asked about it, and it's not like he has some form of censorship of what people can or can't play.
But you're right in distinguishing the groups. Players with ambitions, the main group that search for coaches' and trainers' advice, want to hear what they need to hear. Casual players, that will never hire a coach, want to hear what they like to hear.
And now you get why so few titled players collaborate in forums.
As a "casual"/sometimes tournament player, i am not interested in having a titled player tell me what i want to hear, i want them to tell me what i need to hear. Even us casual players still want some insight from stronger players. And if we decide to play an opening that is deemed to difficult for us, at least we have been forewarned.
Hehe, I had an IM as coach when I was a teen. I left him because –between other things– I didn't want to play what he wanted me to play (basically, HIS opening repertoire). He also said that the Sveshnikov was a piece of trash and that any decent GM should have a field day with it (1980–1981).
Well, he was wrong on that, but I still learned a lot from him. If someone feels IMs' advice don't apply to him, he doesn't need to write a paper justifying it, but check if the context applies and decide by himself for himself. Simple. No trashing required
I believe that, as long as both players are of a similar playing ability, you can play any opening (such as the Catalan) just fine.
Yes, a sub-2300 player will likely play the Catalan inaccurately (at least in some parts), and miss some of the tactical/positional resources available in the ensuing positions.
But it's all relative. Their opponent will likely defend inaccurately and miss some of the tactics/positional resources, as well. So it pretty much evens out.
Along the way, the sub-2300 Catalan player can learn from playing the opening, and improve their handling of it through the years. And maybe they'll even rise toward 2300—or pass it along the way.
Ya, but IM Donaldson's advice has to be taken within the context. Coaches are asked for efficiency, in terms of results over time, to achieve good results. And these results come as a consequence of mastering not only the opening, but the middlegames and endings typical in the system they're asked about.
In common terms, working on the Catalan when lacking deep understanding of several positional nuances and a good ending technique, is the same as trying to lift too much weigh during the first day at the gym.
Then again, if someone isn't interested in running a marathon, he doesn't need to train for one. He can run in the park at his leisure. But if he asks a marathon trainer what should he do, he won't get "just run in the park at your own leisure". Context matters.
There's always a problem with words being taking out of context. Lombardy's statement "winning isn't everything, it's the only thing" (Lombardy didn't invent this, it was in a John Wayne movie about a football coach) became the mantra of many amateur athletes. Lombardy later explained that he was referring to professional football where winning is what brings in the money.
A related forum
Again, I don't know you more than you know me. But I can say you don't know chess enough to be an IM. Since IMs have proven their skill, while you haven't, you need proof to contradict them (lines, variations, a sequence of movements leading to a position that can be evaluated).
So no, they aren't just people when we're talking about chess. Which makes your opinions less credible when contradicting them. Got it?
By the way, not a single adjective. Learn mister, learn. Show manners.>>>I'm sixty-bleedin'-six and I took up chess aged 36, so what are the chances of becoming an I.M. even if I wanted to? And I had no intention of spending too much time on chess. Funnily enough, I have a life, whereas your constantly obsessive and ridiculous behaviour convinces me that you do not and, moreover, that you cannot be well.So I have my own opinions, regarding you and on other matters. Sometimes, my opinions do not coincide with yours or with those of others. Tough. Learn to accept the real world and please stop distracting others with your stupidity. This is a chess forum.
@Optimissed. You're an odd person. Now shoo.
You're a psychopath, so far as I can tell. You have to learn to co-exist, though, with those you dislike.
Don't you have a nurse?
I forgot you own this thread, in your mind, of course. I wish I had a nurse. Female, about 24. Intelligent and attractive.
Mister, you're embarrassing yourself. You are disrespecting everybody with your bad manners. If you're not going to contribute to the thread, maybe you can take a sleeping pill or something.
Ah, by the way, contribute doesn't include insulting other people nor posting walls about your life.
You'll see a lot of conflicting advice all over the place. There is no one true path.
I was going to say that if the IM is your coach and/or you follow a lot of the IM's "prescriptions", then you should follow his advice about not playing the Catalan, because chances are pretty good that it's all meant to work together. Don't be shy about asking for the reason behind that advice, though.
Since you mentioned that you do have a coach, and that he, too, plays the Catalan, then I'd lean towards sticking with your coach and what he has to say. When you have a coach, you need to either abide by [the vast majority of] that coach's teachings or find a new coach; what you should not do is take advice from all over the place as if it were as valid as that from your own coach. But .... DO talk to your coach about what IM Donaldson said, and ask your coach for his opinion; what you're looking for is some flexibility in thinking, that shows that your coach doesn't just completely disagree with an IM and that your coach can understand why IM Donaldson would say such a thing, as well as come up with some sensible reason why you can go right on playing the Catalan as usual.
Your coach [hopefully] knows you. He should know your goals, your timeline for those goals, etc. IM Donaldson was clearly addressing ambitious players with a goal of getting to 2300 (and probably beyond) in as short a period of time as they're able. It could be that reaching 2300 isn't all that important to you, but you do have the short term goal of maximizing your score against other under 1800 players. In that case, IM Donaldson's advice doesn't really apply to you, does it? After all, he's not your coach, and he doesn't know you well enough to give such advice to you, personally.