That's a sad response, but you may be right, hicetnunc.
As an aside, I too have little patience for those publicly announcing their ailments to complete strangers. Many of us have ailments without seeking sympathy from strangers.
We all have our "issues"
That's a sad response, but you may be right, hicetnunc.
As an aside, I too have little patience for those publicly announcing their ailments to complete strangers. Many of us have ailments without seeking sympathy from strangers.
Exactly! What's the point of doing such a thing?
That's a sad response, but you may be right, hicetnunc.
As an aside, I too have little patience for those publicly announcing their ailments to complete strangers. Many of us have ailments without seeking sympathy from strangers.
Exactly! What's the point of doing such a thing?
Attention, which is my first thought with this guy, or he honestly doesnt know any better.
And Harvey do you know what you are? you are an
ASSHOLE
The above...for posterity.
And Harvey do you know what you are? you are an
ASSHOLE
The above...for posterity.
Since pretty much everyone has one, kinda makes us all really unoriginal. Oh wait...pointing out a body part that you more than likely have is an insult right?
Look up the word malice. You have a weird sense of things if you think that this was innocuous. If it was, he could have referred to hundreds of other body parts, such as:
EAR
I am not your "friend" and shall never be. You are anything but friendly.
And, I don't have to stoop so low as to the implication of your above post.
Look up the word malice. You have a weird sense of things if you think that this was innocuous. If it was, he could have referred to hundreds of other body parts, such as:
EAR
Never understood the insult "a**hole"
It's high time chess.com limits posting rights of new non-premium members by default...
Yes.
No sir, please no, sir, sir, please no.
You've been here one day and have 85 posts. The most useful post was a game where your opponent made several egregious blunders. The norm has been juvenile nonsense. Your activity is an argument for hicetnunc's proposal.
No sir, please no, sir, sir, please no.
You've been here one day and have 85 posts. The most useful post was a game where your opponent made several egregious blunders. The norm has been juvenile nonsense. Your activity is an argument for hicetnunc's proposal.
New free members should have the following limitations:
1 post per day for the first 30 days.
a bit of nonsense is important for ones life. usually i post good content.
Define "good content"
Band_Sagger = BAD content
Sagg-Bander = BAD content
I rest my case.
?????? Is there any proof in this topic pro or contra underrating opening studies? What kind of opening studies is meant? How is it done best? What are the differences between levels of strength?
Title players, Coaches, and high level players usually tell beginners and low level players not to study openings.
The main reason why they tell beginners not to study opening is because most beginners do opening study wrongly. In most cases they do not do it properly. Many beginners believe studying openings means to memorize a bunch of moves. Than play those moves no matter what their opponent does. Which would render this type of opening study pointless and counter productive! I believe this is one of the main issues.
Another issue which happens is based not off the opening which is chosen to be studied. Some beginners will pick a opening which is to tactically or positionally above their skill level. In which case they can often struggle figuring out why some moves are done in the opening. Thus, Leading to mistakes.
For example:
I will take the Kings Indian Defense as an illustrated example.
In the above line why has decided to take the black pawn going into like an Exchange Kings Indian Defense.
Lets pretend 2 beginners memorized some openings moves and got to this position. Than white all of a sudden thought. Hey I can win a pawn! What is defending e5??
Well black has memorized a bunch of moves to this point and now has no idea what he should do.
Black has lost a pawn and is confused because he doesn't understand how white can take the pawn.
White in this position usually does not ever take the pawn. Yet his opponent thought it was a free pawn so he grabbed it.
What is black to do? Believe it or not in this position black has a tactic which wins back the pawn.
However, If they are unaware of it than they will be down a pawn.
What is defending e5?? The answer to the question is a tactic! Black has the move Nxe4 in this position to regain the pawn.
What happens if white inserts an inbetween move? Nxf2 hiting the rook?
Believe it or not Nxf2 is a serious blundering move. However, The reason it is a blundering move is because of another tactic!. Which means black has to be aware of 2 tactics in this 1 line. Not to mention all the other lines. It can be overwhelming for a beginner to try and understand or even remember all of this stuff.
Do you see the winning combination for black in this position?
I will leave some space so if you want to figure out on your own you can. If not scroll down and You'll see the answer.
Answer: Bxc3+
Yeah these are 2 examples on how an opening can be very complicated or complex which a beginner might not understand right away.
However, I do believe opening study is important. I believe the best way to do opening study is figuring out/understanding why moves are played.
For example:
If we go back to the KID position.
I believe the best way to study would be to understand why the move is played vs other moves.
Which in the above diagram we see the most played move is 9.Bg5 or 9.Nd5.
At this point than you may study by yourself and say well wait a min why doesn't white take the e5 pawn?
Than you can figure it out with out having to lose tons of games.
Think of all the losses you could of saved yourself by doing this 1 position for like 5 mins.
When I was a beginner I was stubborn played this position most of lost 10 games from this position before I figured you know what maybe its time I learn what I am doing wrong their.
I guess the biggest contribution opening study has is allowing you the chance to save time during a game.
If you looked at this line for 1 hour or 2 by yourself outside of a game. It could save you 1 hour of thinking time during a real live game. It may even save you 1 hour of losing in this position lol by same opponent lol. Esspecially if your the type of player I am.
I face 1 person and I stay their till they leave or I have to leave lol. We play a marathon of games. They end up beating me using same thing as before they stack up a line of wins lol.
I could go on and on about the benefits of opening study.
I mean it can give you confidence. If you was to study this position and than end up playing some person who plays this line against you. Think of how confident you will be in that game. You will feel as if your moves are OK.
It can give you comfort.
It can give you an idea of were you might of gone wrong some were later in the opening etc.
Yeah it can do a lot of things. I personally believe everyone will have to do it one day. I do not see why they should wait until the end of time before they start doing opening study. Same thing can be said with middle game or endgame. I think if a person no choses to engage in it they are only hurting themselves.
However, I understand why some people don't like to do it. I think it is mainly do to personal taste.
For example:
I hate studying endgames. They are so simplified and dull. I get no joy from looking at them. I would even say I ignore them. Which is why I lose alot of games in the endgame. It is because of my own stupid stubborn-ness.
I will have to study it eventually. I like the opening and middle game parts of chess. They make me happy. All the pieces on the board so many things and idea's to come up with.
Endgame seems so dead and lifeless.
a bit of nonsense is important for ones life. usually i post good content.
1 in 86 is not usual. It is the exception.
I don't know about anyone else, but at the moment I am sick and tired of hearing about openings. Let's go get a beer.
The End
X_PLAYER_J: I can't believe you find endgames lifeless! If you are the type of person that finds opening/middlegame study interesting (you clearly do), endgames are like that on steroids - super enjoyable and super fun!
I'm only early on in my serious endgame study, but I've already noticed that it's probably important to choose endgames of relevance. You do have to study the endgame basics, but you can def go overboard in this dept and start hammering away at highly theoretical positions that rarely occur OTB and which will suck the life out of you if you're studying them hard.
I however find that with a good resource, studying endgames that are closer to late-middlegames, with good commentary (like a master analyzing a Capablanca endgame) is really great stuff - unlike openings,a lot of the lines are winning or losing, not "probably equal", which makes for some sharp study and analysis. The challenge is finding that resource - I'm still working on finding a book that does this well.
I have to admit that I bought Fundamental Chess Endings by Lamprecht & Muller a few years ago with high expectations, and I gotta say that I can barely even look at it, it's so dry. Fortunately there are other resources out there.
That's a sad response, but you may be right, hicetnunc.
As an aside, I too have little patience for those publicly announcing their ailments to complete strangers. Many of us have ailments without seeking sympathy from strangers.