players need to start playing obscure openings against magnus

im pretty sure the average chess hustler  in new york would fair well against magnus because of obscure openings and tactics that magnus is not accustomed to

well don't you think 1. a4 would suprise him?

"obscure openings" : if they are obscure, there is a reason...

They are just unsound and playing unsound against stronger opponent, specially against world champion, is the first step to a crushing defeat.

The ridiculous original post gave a chance to bring this interesting topic. Yermolinsky told once a story about he and Jalifman discussing Kasparov's repertoire, and when he suggested it could be a good idea to avoid main lines, Jalifman strongly disagreed: "normal" GM's should follow them, especially playing white, because:

- You are on the shoulders of giants, using moves and ideas developed by better players, what raises your level.

- Main lines enter more deeply into middlegame and the positions achieved are easier to handle.

- Therefore, the higher rated player must choose between following a theoretical line until the end, with less chances of a win, or making an inferior move to avoid simplifications.

"In Linares 1999, against Kasparov, Svidler tried 1 e4 c5  2 Nf3 d6  3 d4 cxd4  4 Qxd4 and lost, Adams was overplayed in the Closed Sicilian, Topalov and Anand tried suspicious lines in Najdorf 6 Be3 and both were beaten. Kasparov won all those games playing black. If those guys didn't success, who will?" (Yermolinsky).

I quoted Jalifman and Yermo as a way to bring an interesting discussion. I can't have a clue if they are right or not. You can always recall that game of Miles, when he played 1 ...a6 against Karpov and won. But as a general rule I'd say the IM is right when stating obscure openings are obscure for a reason. Also, don't forget I'm talking about GM's (maybe average ones, as themselves say, but very strong players anyway), you can bet they know what they are doing when handling theory even if it was developed by others.

Think so, it must be the Spanish transcription.  

Even at my level there's a point on discussing this. I have a mate who always plays KIA, KID and Pirc, very rarely Bird and Dutch. He laughs when someone say him top players usually avoid those openings (some even dare to say they are refuted!!), and I fully agree with him, at our level you can play virtually anything! But I've also told him a couple of times: "but what about all the things you are missing? You don't want to learn some chess?"

I agree, but my approach is simply playing them. I play 1. ...e5 against 1. e4, for example. Many things can happen then, and I try to face all of them, but I don't try to memorize lines, I just play according to basic principles. I dare to say you'll learn more about chess on this way than trying to narrow your repertoire as much as possible. Of course, why don't adopt the Pirc or even the Alekhine if you think it suits you? But at low-intermediate level I think there's a lot for explore in wider battlefields before you are experienced enough.

The way my mind works, I have trouble memorizing, but excel at thinking. Therefore I don't concern myself with trying to memorize openings as I'd likely forget the line long before I encountered it in a game. Now I can remember concept so I find my study time is best used looking at middle game or end game analysis. Amazingly some GMs claim they can remember thousands of games.

Yes, only Alekhine and Fischer were able to avoid that fate.

Magnus can remember at least 10,000 games.

Magnus meets the hustlers:

http://www.vgtv.no/#!/video/73842/se-carlsen-knuse-new-yorks-34-chess-hustlers-34

Players way below 2800 understand the basics and can play a reasonable game on their own. No opening knowledge required.

This is true of players rated 800 or below. Once you get above a rating of 800, you begin to need to have some knowledge of openings.

However it would be hard to say that a player rated below 800 can play a reasonable game on their own.

There were very strong players before opening books were printed. They made their own openings. Some of them we still use today. Understanding chess is enough to play reasonably in the opening, no need to memorize anything.

Although in the modern age it's true this isn't a practical way to go about it. I suggest players memorize the first few moves of any opening they intend to play, even if the moves make no sense to them.

Also, GMs have seen a MASSIVE amount of games. Even when they say they know "nothing" about an opening, they probably know more than most patzers who play the opening every day lol :)

I have never played a master one to one, but I have played Isak Sjøberg, a kid that will become a master soon.What happend in our last game was that he of course knew the opening well, and I was out of theory in a few moves. From then I played as good as I could, but in move 12  i slipped off the mainline. Isak saw that instantly. He had never seeen that position before. He thought hard and efficeient in 40 minutes, found a very strong answer and went from a small advantage to a more dominant advantage.

I have played GM Vladimir Georgiev in a simultan. I played relatively mainline, with a couple small inaccuracies. He spotted them, punished them, and in the middlegame he was two pawns up with a better position. I resigned in move 42, when the very  last hope of holding the draw was vanished. 

The good players punishes small bad steps extremely precise, and wins the games. 

Those hustlers are strong, maybe FM strenght? The manager of Magnus, FM Espen Agdestein(2372 fide) lost to a hustler, and Magnus had to straighten the records.

It's not the opening. They need to learn the endgame,to beat Magnus.

That is enough to survive outside the book. All he need is to think as he usually does. Stepping outside the books makes it easier for GM`s, because they can stop memorizing and start playing, and because those outsidesteps are less accurate and easy to punish.

Perhaps but obscure openings will never work against a computer