Interesting. I've been building a custom opening tree. I've been working on it for three months after deciding to learn queen's pawn openings, and I'm pretty close to getting a 13-move opening tree repertoire completed. I've been using current master's games and opening books. It's pretty rough. I'm going to check it by checking the lines, eliminating some, then playing and analyzing games. I generally work on learning the first eight moves first.
I'm continuing to study tactics and endgames.
... There is one issue where with every post you advocate by default that a chess player build his/her opening tree by hand. ...
I am not aware of having written anything one way or the other on this issue. It strikes me as unlikely that all beginners should run out and immediately buy Chessbase. It also strikes me as unlikely that all players should wait until after buying Chessbase to do any reading about openings. Beyond, that, I am, for the moment, content to leave people to assess your commentary for themselves.
__________________
The goal of chess study and practice is to build a set of visualization pattern memory banks in the following areas:
Tactics, Openings, Middlegames, Endgames. Tactics and Endgames are visualization patterns memory banks that have to be built by hand. Only in those 2 areas(Tactics and Endgames) do your posts prove of any use. Tactics are best studied and practiced with Tactics books with diagrams and a chess timer. Endgame tablebases are a great check of accuracy of all endgame publications. Endgame publications, books, articles, videos are necessary. Openings and Middlegames can be studied and practiced with the essential aid of Chessbase software. It provides the organized study and practice of one's opening repertoire that is seamlessly threaded with ChessBase games data base (5+ million games) to repeat opening and middlegame visualization pattern memory banks.
The most essential feature it provides is the automation of the building of the opening tree. The software does it automatically in the beginning and then with every game that is added to the games database. Saves a lot of headaches in the beginning and every time in between. Yes, the books, videos, articles, etc. are necessary to understand the visualization memory banks. But that comes with time. What the chess player craves is winning.
The important feature for the beginner is that first, they win a lot more games. Blunders are inevitable when memory fails and understanding isn't there yet. But, SITTING ON YOUR HANDS REDUCES ALOT OF BLUNDERS.
Interesting. I've been building a custom opening tree. I've been working on it for three months after deciding to learn queen's pawn openings, and I'm pretty close to getting a 13-move opening tree repertoire completed. I've been using current master's games and opening books. It's pretty rough. I'm going to check it by checking the lines, eliminating some, then playing and analyzing games. I generally work on learning the first eight moves first.
I'm continuing to study tactics and endgames.
_________________
If you are attempting to build an opening tree by hand, I assure you it will take you 8-10 years, that is if you want to have an opening repertoire that will make you competitive with strong 2000 players and above. Don't believe me. Read the literature. It is all there on the internet.
"... Opening Books ... I won’t try to recommend one [general opening book], but if you find one you like, this should be the first opening book you purchase. ... Once you identify an opening you really like and wish to learn in more depth, then should you pick up a book on a particular opening or variation. Start with ones that explain the opening variations and are not just meant for advanced players. ..." - Dan Heisman (2001)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140626180930/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman06.pdf
I have had an opening repertoire for years. Yes, I am aware of the necessity to purchase specialized opening books. Two I can highly recommend are John Nunn's 2 volumes on the Sicilian Najdorf. But ChessBase is irreplaceable to speed up the process of building into your brain the opening and middlegame visualization pattern memory banks.
... I am aware of the necessity to purchase specialized opening books. Two I can highly recommend are John Nunn's 2 volumes on the Sicilian Najdorf. ...
If I remember correctly, those books were written in the last century. Since that time, I think it has become somewhat more common for opening books to be written without being meant for advanced players.
If one is very serious to specialize in openings, Fritz Power Book 2017 is the EVERYTHING. If I havent quit on improving, I will buy it 😎
Do you really think that I haven't updated the info. contained in those books, with new books. I am not going to get into a discussion about the details of my opening repertoire. Why do you think I gave you outdated book references.
You still haven't adequately answered the computer automated vs. by hand building of an opening tree.
... You still haven't adequately answered the computer automated vs. by hand building of an opening tree.
I do not feel a need to satisfy your notion of adequacy.
"... It strikes me as unlikely that all beginners should run out and immediately buy Chessbase. It also strikes me as unlikely that all players should wait until after buying Chessbase to do any reading about openings. Beyond, that, I am, for the moment, content to leave people to assess your commentary for themselves. ..." - me (~1 hour ago)
Do you really think that I haven't updated the info. contained in those books, with new books. ...
I do not know what you have done. It did seem possible to me that some people might not be aware of the age of the John Nunn Najdorf books.
What the chess player craves is winning.
If ChessBase satisfies that craving, then chess players that can afford it will buy it. Just like they go out and buy chess engines.
All of this nonsense about reading and understanding can come later.
The John Nunn Najdorf books contain info. that is important. I know what it is. You have to figure it out.
We have both gotten smarter by communicating with each other.
... All of this nonsense about reading and understanding can come later. ...
"... Opening Books ... I won’t try to recommend one [general opening book], but if you find one you like, this should be the first opening book you purchase. ... Once you identify an opening you really like and wish to learn in more depth, then should you pick up a book on a particular opening or variation. Start with ones that explain the opening variations and are not just meant for advanced players. ..." - Dan Heisman (2001)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140626180930/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman06.pdf
... The John Nunn Najdorf books contain info. that is important. I know what it is. You have to figure it out. ...
I do not regard myself as having to do something according to your specification. I imagine that many here do not play the Najdorf.
Don't MEMORIZE openings until 2000.
That's the correct tip. You could even argue that 2200 is the correct rating cap.
Studying openings, at all levels, is immensely useful, because it teaches you new ideas, both tactical and positional. There are a lot of excellent opening books out there that will improve your chess greatly.
BUT.
Knowing openings won't help you break 2000! It's your general chess knowledge that will, and sub-2200 games are almost always decided by something entirely other than the opening. If player A gets a "comfortable advantage" out of the opening, that doesn't mean they're going to win the game at sub 2200-level.
... The John Nunn Najdorf books contain info. that is important. I know what it is. You have to figure it out. ...
I do not regard myself as having to do something according to your specification.
____________________
Nor am I asking or requesting that. All I am asking is that you answer why you want people to build an opening tree by hand, a task that requires 8-10 years of a chess player's life. Rather than buy ChessBase and have the computer and the software build an opening tree in 2-3 years.
Don't MEMORIZE openings until 2000.
That's the correct tip. You could even argue that 2200 is the correct rating cap.
Studying openings, at all levels, is immensely useful, because it teaches you new ideas, both tactical and positional. There are a lot of excellent opening books out there that will improve your chess greatly.
BUT.
Knowing openings won't help you break 2000! It's your general chess knowledge that will, and sub-2200 games are almost always decided by something entirely other than the opening. If player A gets a "comfortable advantage" out of the opening, that doesn't mean they're going to win the game at sub 2200-level.
________________________
Please get up to speed with the conversation by reading the last 8 to 9 posts.
... All I am asking is that you answer why you want people to build an opening tree by hand, ...
Since you identify no specific quote of me, I do not know how you came to have your incorrect notion about what I want.
... All I am asking is that you answer why you want people to build an opening tree by hand, ...
Since you identify no quote, I do not know how you came to have your incorrect notion about what I want.
_____________________
Most of your posts are regarding clickable books, videos, etc. I see no mention of the need to build an opening tree. Nor any mention of ChessBase or Chess Openings Wizard or any other opening software.
So, once again by default are you promoting building an opening tree by hand
... There is one issue where with every post you advocate by default that a chess player build his/her opening tree by hand. ...
I am not aware of having written anything one way or the other on this issue. It strikes me as unlikely that all beginners should run out and immediately buy Chessbase. It also strikes me as unlikely that all players should wait until after buying Chessbase to do any reading about openings. Beyond, that, I am, for the moment, content to leave people to assess your commentary for themselves. Had it not been for your posted claim about what I was advocating "by default", I would not have thought it necessary to make the comments I have made here.