maybe 150 years ago
Can you become a master without memorizing openings?
Sort:
The complaint I'm hearing from the book FINDING BOBBY FISCHER is that too many modern players are memorizing openings to the "18th" move and don't know where to go from there.
Apr 19, 2021
0
#26
seattlewag wrote:
Is NM National master? In any case thanks for patronizing my thread.
I do not think ih8sens was being patronizing.
seattlewag wrote:
Is NM National master? In any case thanks for patronizing my thread.
Google is your best friend.
Apr 19, 2021
0
#28
B1ZMARK wrote:
seattlewag wrote:
Is NM National master? In any case thanks for patronizing my thread.
I do not think ih8sens was being patronizing.
Patronizing has opposite meanings depending on context.
Patronizing can mean 'visit', or 'act superior'. In this case I think he just was thanking me for my reply, which is just a slight misuse of the word.
Apr 19, 2021
0
#29
ih8sens wrote:
B1ZMARK wrote:
seattlewag wrote:
Is NM National master? In any case thanks for patronizing my thread.
I do not think ih8sens was being patronizing.
Patronizing has opposite meanings depending on context.
Patronizing can mean 'visit', or 'act superior'. In this case I think he just was thanking me for my reply, which is just a slight misuse of the word.
Yes, I googled it just to be sure... "apparently being kind but betraying superiority" (my summary of the definition) which I didn't feel like it fit with your post.
B1ZMARK wrote:
.........................Photographic memory definitely will help, but not as much as you think.
It depends on how well aligned your brain cells are!
Apr 19, 2021
0
#31
No. If you don't understand the subtleties of the openings played by your opponents, you will wind up coming out of the opening with a bit of a disadvantage. That's all it takes for a top GM to grind out a win, even if you are otherwise as good a player as them. So you would never be able to win enough games in enough tough GM tournaments to achieve the GM norms.
Mir Sultan Khan never had a chess rating as the elo system had yet to be invented. Grandmaster titles hadn't been regularized yet either--Tsar Nicholas of Russia awarded prizes to the top finishers of the St. Petersburg 1914 tournament and called them the "Grand Masters of Chess" and the term entered popular usage to describe great players but FIDE didn't set up the system to qualify for official titles until years later.
All top players have a phenomenal memory for chess positions. Some have near "photographic" memories. Morphy memorized the entire Louisiana law code. (This didn't help him with his openings much as there was little opening theory at the time--his games started the development of chess theory.) Now so much has been studied by so many for so long that hoping to compete at the highest level without extensive knowledge would be impossible.
Apr 19, 2021
0
#32
pfren wrote:
Yes.
I mean... if you play enough games to become master, you're going to have memorized something... it may not be standard theory, or even very good, but you'll have openings simply from playing and thinking about how to play better chess.
Apr 19, 2021
0
#33
It's an interesting question... I think the answer is no, but not for the reason you're thinking.
It's "no" because by playing thousands of games with other players around master level, you're going to learn from the games... whether you steal the openings they play, or come up with novel moves, you'll still have openings you're familiar with and those you aren't.
It's sort of like asking whether a beginner knows as much as a self taught ______ (fill in the blank with any skill you like). The answer is "no" because the self taught person knows things and the beginner doesn't.
---
But ok, that's not answering the spirit of the question. The OP probably is asking whether you can be a 2200 player without buying opening resources and spending a long time memorizing GM moves... most people will never be 2200, but it's still low enough that you don't have to know openings in that way.
Apr 19, 2021
0
#35
seattlewag wrote:
Anyway, I'm wondering if I can be competitive just studying tactics and analyzing games?
First of all, top players don't memorize openings all day. They're extremely good at all parts of the game, even parts people don't write books about... openings are just a tiny part of chess, and a part that most beginners obsess over.
Anyway, if your question is how to improve, the best way to improve is to be well rounded. Study a little bit of everything. If you like tactics, that's fine, work on tactics for a while, maybe a few months, but then switch to strategy or endgames for a few months. If you like analyzing your games and looking over GM games, that's also very good, you can dedicate some time to just that. Openings tend to be the least important (because openings are the most forgiving phase of the game).
seattlewag wrote:
Migraine I should have stated things differently, not come off as impractical as I probably did. I will likely familiarize myself with openings now that I'm becoming more serious, I'm just not going to memorize all of them 30 moves at a time. I am not going ruin my enjoyment of the game by playing it rote. Bobby Fischer himself said that largely destroyed the beauty of the game, that's why he came up with Fischer Random-which remains an option if I can't be eminently successful at conventional chess without playing like a robot. I'm going to study openings from a tactical standpoint, but I am not going to commit every optimal move for every possible situation or variation, to memory. I think that might be what drove both Fischer and Paul Morphe out of their minds, but what do I know? Not openings!
I do try to develop my Knights and Bishops as early as I can, many might even argue too early in some cases. I'm in the habit of trying to pin pieces to the king and queen, almost as soon as they come out. I also try to get my knights to the center of the board where they are the most powerful, at least in the early game, as soon as possible.
Getting back to openings, it occurs to me that having played almost exclusively against machines, bots and programs with extensive opening books, on a relatively high level, for many years, that I probably already have some familiarity with openings I wasn't even aware of. Pattern recognition and such. Obviously that's not mastery by any stretch ... but it's not the way of a dilettante or novice, either.
got it thx
Apr 19, 2021
0
#37
seattlewag wrote:
I'm a newbie and haven't figured out how to reply to individual posts yet, so I'm going to have to thank both of you, barondali and sir migraine, here. This is great information and exactly the sort of encouragement I was looking for. I know my opinion is probably controversial but I'm just not going to play the memorization game, I see it as having largely ruined chess. I'm going to look up Kahn, thanks again Dali. If either of you are still here, how many Grandmasters do you guys figure, have something akin to a photographic memory?
if you can see a " next to the post number, click it. then in the typing interface, that message will appear. You can edit it whatever way you want, like I bolded some of your text.
Apr 19, 2021
0
#38
Ilampozhil25 wrote:
seattlewag wrote:
I'm a newbie and haven't figured out how to reply to individual posts yet, so I'm going to have to thank both of you, barondali and sir migraine, here. This is great information and exactly the sort of encouragement I was looking for. I know my opinion is probably controversial but I'm just not going to play the memorization game, I see it as having largely ruined chess. I'm going to look up Kahn, thanks again Dali. If either of you are still here, how many Grandmasters do you guys figure, have something akin to a photographic memory?
if you can see a " next to the post number, click it. then in the typing interface, that message will appear. You can edit it whatever way you want, like I bolded some of your text.
Got it, thanks.
Apr 19, 2021
0
#39
seattlewag wrote:
Ilampozhil25 wrote:
seattlewag wrote:
I'm a newbie and haven't figured out how to reply to individual posts yet, so I'm going to have to thank both of you, barondali and sir migraine, here. This is great information and exactly the sort of encouragement I was looking for. I know my opinion is probably controversial but I'm just not going to play the memorization game, I see it as having largely ruined chess. I'm going to look up Kahn, thanks again Dali. If either of you are still here, how many Grandmasters do you guys figure, have something akin to a photographic memory?
if you can see a " next to the post number, click it. then in the typing interface, that message will appear. You can edit it whatever way you want, like I bolded some of your text.
Got it, thanks.
you're welcome
Apr 20, 2021
0
#40
B1ZMARK wrote:
seattlewag wrote:
What about photographic memory guys? I have a prodigious long-term Collective memory, but my flash memory is not the least bit formidable. I really struggle with games like concentration, but maybe that's because I've never really tried to develop it mentally. Playing without looking at the board seems like an esoteric concept to me. Can one actually learn to play mental chess, or is that a gift you have to pretty much be born with or develop very early on?
It's an acquired skill, unless you have an actual mental disorder where you can't visualize things in your head (forgot what it was called). Photographic memory definitely will help, but not as much as you think.
I have more than my share of psychiatric disorders, but hopefully, God willing, I won't have to add anymore cognitive impairments to the Magna Carta of mental health records. Imagine the state I would be in, if I went full OCD on openings! New York probably. Little joke there to lighten the mood :-)
What about photographic memory guys? I have a prodigious long-term Collective memory, but my flash memory is not the least bit formidable. I really struggle with games like concentration, but maybe that's because I've never really tried to develop it mentally. Playing without looking at the board seems like an esoteric concept to me. Can one actually learn to play mental chess, or is that a gift you have to pretty much be born with or develop very early on?
It's an acquired skill, unless you have an actual mental disorder where you can't visualize things in your head (forgot what it was called). Photographic memory definitely will help, but not as much as you think.