Opening Repertoirs are for beginners.

calculation2 wrote:

"..., Top Gm's don't even pretend to have [an opening repertoire], so please..."

"Michael Adams is the last of the super-GMs whose repertoire we will be examinimg here. ..." - FM Steve Giddins (2003) in a chapter about "Some Players' Repertoires".

GMs don't have a repertoire ?

Come on... For example:

Kramnik: Catalan and Berlin everywhere.

MVL: Najdorf and Gruenfeld are almost always played as black.

Nakamura: King's Indian Defense is a recurrent guest.

Aronian: the Ragozin countless times.

In his times, Kasparov had many periods when he plays certains openings a lot more than the others:

the Spanish, the Najdorf, the King's Indian (later abandoned for the QGD).

Of course, they don't play these openings exclusively, otherwise it would be very simple to prepare against them, nonetheless it's obvious they DO have repertoires.

Exactly!

This is a classic error in reasoning.

Top GM's don't have an opening repertoire (according to you) --> You admire top GM's and would like to be one (one supposes) --> You assume that copying their behavior and their choices, will help you to become like them.

This is quite wrong. Maybe they don't need an opening repertoire anymore, because they studied openings for years. Maybe they have had different opening repertoires, changed and expanded them so often, that they now are capable of playing almost any opening. Maybe they have so much insight in the beginning phase of the game, that regardless of any opening theory, they are perfectly capable of judging the position and finding the best plan. But none of that is an argument why you shouldn't have an opening repertoire.

It's like saying in an OTB game (hypothetically) that you don't need to note down the moves you play, because your favorite GM doesn't either. Difference being that this GM remembers every move of the game, and will note down everything afterwards at home. So if you copy his behavior (not noting the moves) without being in the same situation (remembering everything), you clearly didn't think everything through.

I don't see what is the error in reasoning just by reading your post, I am stating something important based on the sources (GM's) I follow. What is wrong and why everybody likes to say "it is wrong" and "I don't agree", and worse, many insults...Few people actually contributed, thank you from me to these guys!

"... If you find a book that gives you this kind of information - the tabias and the illustrations of successful strategy as well as a clear, verbal outline of what the opening is all about, then it is probably worth your money and, more important, your time. ... You need to have an answer to 1 e4, 1 d4 or 1 c4 and to be quite familiar with your chosen defense. ... When you have White, you need to be familiar with how to play against half a dozen or so defenses. ..." - GM Andrew Soltis (2010)

@op.  thats a bit thin skinned!  I've been polite.  you've said some things that contradict what I have read on chess improvement for the average patzer.

this is NOT that big of a deal.  see the Username.  I neither am a strong player nor a famed coach, teacher, or author.

but... presumably when you say such things on the internet, you want people to express their opinion TOO and welcome their thoughts on the matter.

regarding the insults.  You must be a newby to the chess forums here.  this is very polite compared to some threads we've had.  I've seen people really get rude and offensive.  almost to the point at which there wasn't much point in posting.. just one insult after another.

i guess I just say, that the op has been unclear why he believes as he does, and unpersuasive. if it works for him, awesome.  I will not , though, be staring at gm variation after gm variation.

Bettersingle, thanks for your contributions.  you've been succinct and logical.  I'm Still not sure I agree with you-  but I don't think we're anywhere similar in playing strength.  perhaps that makes a difference?

we've had the whole openings are underrated thread/vibe, before.  I've certainly swung my program towards openings Enough.  its now probably time to get back to tactics. its easy to get soft.  and once your soft enough on tactics- even when you look , espacially, in quicker time controls...you don't see.

@thegreat_patzer sure, it is not towards you, but others you see in the thread, and yes I'm new to the forums here and didn't like it.

Anyway when you say "you've said some things that contradict what I have read on chess improvement for the average patzer" GREAT!, that is the intention, otherwise how can we patzers improve? Please you and anyone willing to share, either here or privately (mail), (is helping each other a new weird concept??)... I was talking about the use of databases for openings, puzzles for tactics, some material for strategy but mostly masters games and the basic endgames we meet most often...but clearly anything on improvement is welcome!

well you've been cordial, and thoughtful.  I totally agree that it is instructive and useful to present different opinions about how to best improve in chess.

I'm unsure whether a database is very useful to learn a opening.  of all the things I have tried; I specifically liked chess videos.

some you-tubers have presented whole annotated games as examples of how to play certain openings.  I like this because I think it is critically important to know What specific tactical and strategic themes are common in an opening.

if you know that the center is likely to become blocked and immobile, you know that giving up your bishops for his knights is a good strategic theme in the opening- and remembering to play for a quick bishop/knight exchange (for me) is easier to remember than dozens of specific grandmaster moves.

books have been (for me) a little dissapointing.  I think really many books simply go into Too much detail.  to much emphases on being methodical and complete and Not enough explanation on strategic themes.

----

btw, on the internet Helping each other IS  a wierd concept. on the other hand thats Exactly why Erik (owner of chess.com) has a chess forum.  

I want to quickly add that chess improvement is, I think, a personal thing.  what works for you might not work for me.

In a 2010 book, GM Andrew Soltis wrote, "... good books can [give a clear verbal description of what an opening is all about] ... If there isn't any text - if it's all just moves - then this isn't the book for you."

"... I feel that the main reasons to buy an opening book are to give a good overview of the opening, and to explain general plans and ideas. ..." - GM John Nunn (2006)

In one of his books about an opening, GM Nigel Davies wrote (2005), "The way I suggest you study this book is to play through the main games once, relatively quickly, and then start playing the variation in actual games. Playing an opening in real games is of vital importance - without this kind of live practice it is impossible to get a 'feel' for the kind of game it leads to. There is time enough later for involvement with the details, after playing your games it is good to look up the line."

it is personal, as we have different objectives too... (also by not being pros and fully dedicated)...anyway books and dvd are good, I read many and watched a lot... but they have drawbacks too, now I decided to use DB's...I guess the main decision (as suggested by my coach) was to dedicate most of the time, 50% on tactics,20% on games (analysing own and others/playing OTB),15%endgames,15% openings...my rating here still doesn't reflect my strength so wait a bit...and let's see if we start helping and giving tips to each other instead of... what you said is the current status is scary...lol...thanks!