Hi
Opening, Middle-game, or Endgame, Which is most critical for improving your chess and why?
Sort:
Ziryab wrote:
blueemu wrote:
You should probably study them all, but your main emphasis should be on the endgame first, later on the middle-game, and focus on openings last.
I concur
Excellent advice. Most players under USCF 1800 are fairly clueless in the endgame. A modicum of endgame knowledge will beat them with some regularity, starting from an even position. Winning through pawn promotion is not exciting enough for these guys to actually study it. Many times, they are like a fish out of water in the endgame. Even when they play like a "big fish" in the opening and middle game.
Player 1: better at opening and endgame
Player 2: better at middlegame
Who do you think would win?
May 13, 2020
0
#45
tuggypetu wrote:
Player 1: better at opening and endgame
Player 2: better at middlegame
Who do you think would win?
It depends.
Depends on what @llama44?
May 13, 2020
0
#47
On how weak the weakest link is.
Anyway it's not a very good question, that's why I gave such a vague answer. It's like asking if a bishop is better than a knight.
I think chess programmers should make some AI or engine to test this
tuggypetu wrote:
Opening, Middle-game, or Endgame, Which is most critical for improving your chess and why?
I think it's middlegame as the most difficult part of the game.
It's almost always one can easily see what he should do in the end of the game.
May 13, 2020
0
#50
tuggypetu wrote:
I think chess programmers should make some AI or engine to test this
Seems like that data would be nebulous and even if not that the results wouldn't be practical.
May 13, 2020
0
#51
korotky_trinity wrote:
tuggypetu wrote:
Opening, Middle-game, or Endgame, Which is most critical for improving your chess and why?
I think it's middlegame as the most difficult part of the game.
It's almost always one can easily see what he should do in the end of the game.
The end of the game isn't the same as the endgame, and even world class grandmasters error in the endgame. Just saying.
Why is the data required?
And why would it be vague?
I was thinking like set engine rating
Opening (move 1-15)
Endgame (4minor pieces left both sides)
Player 1: opening 3000, rest 2800
Player 2: endgame 3000, rest 2800
Something like this, and see who wins
May 13, 2020
0
#54
tuggypetu wrote:
Why is the data required?
And why would it be vague?
Well, for starters, when does the opening end and the middlegame begin? When does the endgame begin?
Sure we can draw some lines, and I have some good answer to those questions, but even then...
How can a computer be good at the middlegame if you don't allow it to properly evaluate positions that occurr in the endgame?
And even then, you need a way to normalize the results. In other words a GM whose weakest phase is the middlegame will still have a stronger middlegame than a 1500 player. So strong and weak are relative.
And finally, traditional engines are not tuned to play the opening and endgame well in the first place. That's why strong players will laugh at you for talking about what stockfish prefers on move 1, or 5 for that matter. That's why ideal setups make use of endgame tablebases to let the engine play well in the endgame.
And it's impractical because we can already say things like the optimal way to improve is to work on your weakest area, and that it takes at least a little skill in all areas to be good.
This is off the top of my head. I wonder if I can add more if I tried 
I see.
I think chess programmers will be able to find a way around these problems.
Even though the result may not be practical for human chess.
But the result can show some estimation as to which phase of the game is more important.
korotky_trinity wrote:
tuggypetu wrote:
Opening, Middle-game, or Endgame, Which is most critical for improving your chess and why?
I think it's middlegame as the most difficult part of the game.
It's almost always one can easily see what he should do in the end of the game.
i somewhat agree with you that middlegame is the most difficult
Also, i disagree about the endgame. Theres pressure to find the accurate moves in this phase. Its not always so easy. Sometimes the positions tend to be complex.
old chess computers started the endgame when one side had 14 points of material or less on the board not including pawns just pieces.
dfgh123 wrote:
old chess computers started the endgame when one side had 14 points of material or less on the board not including pawns just pieces.
gee... that would take decades
14 points without pawns are a lot!
https://www.chess.com/live/game/4803215764
As I recall you've both played the french forever, so maybe you'd have some fun games.
... but it seems at least in that one you were a lot faster, ended the game with about 1 minute.
I've played the French a lot and beaten a few masters with it, but not forever. I started playing the French 17 years ago. I took up the Sicilian 42 years ago, and still often transpose into it from the French when that's what White wants.