Study openings or endgames?

"... Can it really be that the endgame is more important than other phases of the game?

I would say that it is more a question of balance than of one phase being more worthy of our study time than another. Let us sketch the portrait of a modern player to illustrate the typical imbalance:

> ... it is no great task to build up a high-level opening repertoire. Time consuming perhaps, but the path to take is not a difficult one. ...

> Combined with the knowledge of standard schemes in the middlegame - linked to their opening repertoire (which is relatively easy to attain, by playing through master games in the relevant openings) - we have painted the picture of quite a formidable foe.

All of this is perfectly reasonable, and I encourage the reader to spend time doing exactly these things.

We have, however, a clear motivation here for focusing (at least some) of our chess energy on the endgame ..." - some more of what IM Jonathan Hawkins wrote in his book, Amateur to IM (after referring to his biggest leap forward from endgame study)

There are already pages of discussion and lengthy advice.

The key is to start studying. One easy way to decide what to study is to play a game, then take a close look at it and study what strikes you as the most interesting aspects of that game.

So you don't want to claim that Suetin made a statement to ignore the opening?

"It is important for club players to build up a suitable opening repertoire." - GM Artur Yusupov (2010)

Learn the basic Queens Gambit, and Kings opening as white, and QGD and either a Sicilian, French, or e4,e5 as black. And I mean basic, just the structures and ideas, not precise lines (most players below 2000 or so go out of book fairly quickly, so knowing 18 moves deep in the main line of the QGD doesnt help much if he just played Nd2 instead Nc3 for example).

When playing against gambits, take it unless you can see why not, then every move after quickly evaluate e4/e5 and d4/d5 pushes, a lot of times those will be the moves that return the material but give you a comfortable game.

That should get you out of the opening into a playable middlegame, and really shouldnt take that much time.

After that endgames, endgames, endgames and endgames.

Tactics, can be studied of course, but they are often part of endgames, you will see them in your openings, everywhere in fact. And you learn from being exposed to them. But reverse that. Understanding why your opponent just won that K and P ending, or how to draw a K R and P ending can be brutal otb, but easily shown in a few lessons.

As an addendum. Any basic book will help you improve. Just pick up an old Fred Reinfeld or Chernev book.

False.

I am not trying to mislead people.

Please note that I was reacting to a statement about what a player can start at 1800.

"In this lesson we will examine the most important principles in playing the opening. …" - on page 30 of Build Up Your Chess with Artur Yusupov The Fundamentals

You seem to have been looking at Boost Your Chess The Fundamentals which does have 9 pages about opening traps.

Not sure what book DeirdreSkye has in mind at this point, but:

"... The following lines show that White has obtained a strong initiative: a) …" - GM Artur Yusupov (on page 151 of Build Up Your Chess 2), presenting "lines" that did not take place in the game under discussion (I. Glek - O. Romanishin, Biel 1996)

Do you think that I have said something about Gobet disagreeing with Yusupov? I don't remember seeing a quoted sentence of Gobet.

How exactly do these page after page of back and forth help the original poster? 

In the mean time, I'll reiterate my seemingly simplistic idea (backed up by numerous respected trainers): study what interests you.

Play a few games, study them, find out what you're lacking in your own game, and work on your weakest link. This is advice that Garry Kasparov and others recommend. 

Avoid the back-and-forth that you find on these forum sites, and start studying!

Do you have an objection to the post #28 quoting Hawkins? What about the post #33 with more of what Hawkins said?

Yes, Bobby. That is my experience too. The Yusupov series is NOT designed for beginners. Yusupov himself admitted that he vastly underestimated the starting rating range his books were aimed at. 

The Step program that is popular in Europe is an excellent resource for beginners. It has its flaws too, but it's a great way to learn the basics. It mixes up tactics, opening traps, and endgame principles in a fun way for most students. 

Of course, the ideal is to get a trainer to help a student. But the key, as I stated earlier, is just to begin studying what interests you. 

The main thing to remember about chess is that it's a game! Have fun!

Did anyone claim that it was designed for beginners? You may recall that I was reacting to a statement about what a player can start at 1800. (See post #37.)

BobbyTalparov wrote: "What you were referring to is a bit irrelevant.  The original post is written by a new player asking what he should study.  The Yusupov books are great, but I would not hand them to a beginner."

It seems to me that #37 was relevant to #34 and #53 was relevant to #52. Can you quote a sentence from this thread where anyone set out to hand the Yusupov books to a beginner?

By inference, you did, @kindaspongey. You recommended the Yusupov series in a thread written by and for a beginner.

Next question.

Can you quote a specific kindaspongey sentence that recommended the Yusupov series?

Nope. I'm gonna focus on the original question, which was for beginners, not club players. 

Study what interests you. Play a few games, then take a look at what sorts of mistakes you're making and study those. 

The Step method, which is quite popular in Europe, is an excellent first resource for novices.