Krone wrote:
The Grundfeld defence : The grundfeld becomes me and I grundfeld. This is the type of relationships you must have with the openings you play. In my case it pays double if not triple and I am ever grateful to grundfeld. But the repertoire as I believe is like your wife you can't throw it away. If you are unmarried it's your girlfriend, if single it's your right foot. There are good times and bad times so bear it together.
Not to be confused with the Grünfeld of course. Any opening that Kasparov favours can't be that bad (in the sense of weak - though it may not suit everyone's playing style).
What do you mean by "to be filled up"?
Has anyone ever thought of becoming a Grandmaster(GM) or at least an International master(IM)? Well, my system has nothing to do with young/old, beginner/master but it all depends on your study habits. Here we go :-
1. To have or not to : "Opening repertoire"
In the long run it boils down to two words, "opening repertoire". It tells everything about the person as a chess player or as a human. I can't more emphasis than this.
A repertoire is a weapon that defines you. Say I play e4 as white and sicilian against e4 as black. Do you want to say something about my style but wait cos I'll tell you something more about d4. Against d4 Nimzo-Indian came forward generously to help me. It didn't work. I found refuge in Queen's gambit accepted, fairly successful. You know I am still a young man and always wanted more. After partial good-bye to QGA something hit me, you can call it inspiration but I won't Because...
The Grundfeld defence : The grundfeld becomes me and I grundfeld. This is the type of relationships you must have with the openings you play. In my case it pays double if not triple and I am ever grateful to grundfeld. But the repertoire as I believe is like your wife you can't throw it away. If you are unmarried it's your girlfriend, if single it's your right foot. There are good times and bad times so bear it together.
2. Connection between openings and endings Middlegame is the almighty :-
No matter what my rela to grun, winning is not enough by openings alone. I say I know this opening if only I already knows the plans, tactics and strategies that comes up in the middlegame. Handling the middle shows the depth of the openings. And the endings are consequences of your actions in the openings. The king which is killed in the opening cannot be alive in the middlegame or endgame. That would be against the universal law. Never think about it. The middle looks after the deficiencies of the openings, have negotiations with his higher self and hand over the complications to the ending. In the ending, all is decided, ie. even if you desperately wanted to win the game, if the position is lost, it's lost. With all humility you can only wait for the next game.
3. Books or computers :
What has worked for thousands I cannot refute, books may be the best. Some prefer softwares, they are different breed of nature. I as a chess player use both with equal ease and with equal treatment.
For opening preparation start with the book, start with the computer(Rybka/fritz) where the book ends. With computer, analyse certain variations likely to happen in your game as deep as you can. When that is done, I know you are hungry, and during the game your opponent seems to be your delicious. The exact position, oh my gosh appear on the board and it's the crucial round. You want your opponent to move faster but you realise that only your heart beats faster. That's fine you know what next.
4. The psychology : does it exist I hope it does
During the tournament games, I personally lost more games related to psychology than the actual chess skills though psychology too is a skill depicting your levels of play. It starts when the players reach expert level or even before for somebody. You know there is always someone who starts earlier than they should, no offence.
cases :
a) My opponent is stronger than me
b) My opponent is weaker than me
c) Distractions like staring, eating, lots of movement
d) to be filled up
As a summary we know that studying chess involves no doubt openings, endgames, tactics, strategy, analysing and of course psychology which cannot be discarded. In chess it is better to be logical, objective and reasonable rather than to be emotional or psychological. If truth and lies had a bout, we know lies would be K.O.