I can understand why some people dont like studying endings, they arent easy to study, learn, and understand. This also explains the love affair with openings. Openings are a piece of cake compared to endings.
Look at the forum topics:
Chess Openings
Topics: 21071
Posts: 282928
Endgame Study
Topics: 3787
Posts: 32091
hhnngg1 wrote:
"... 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."
http://www.theweekinchess.com/john-watson-reviews/theres-an-end-to-it-all
a bit of nonsense is important for ones life. usually i post good content.
I hope you're joking. Who gave you that piece of advice?
i post good content on other account.
Since when have hypocritical comments become "good content"? I'm just curious to know.
cant you read ?
Yes, I can. However, I find it pointless to argue with you again. Say what you will. I don't really care.
the word curious means you want to know something, not that you dont care.
That was from a previous comment. I wanted to know the answer, but I've decided that it isn't important at all. Have fun trolling!
How would you call the following game? Godlike, insane, incredble or masterpiece?
It's a very accurate game.
Dude, i'm telling you. It's a nonsense argument to say, "Oh opening study won't help you b/c it's just memorizing moves." lmao. It's so stupid, because openings are not just memorizing moves. Openings are so much more than that. It's a strawman argument because memorizing random moves *WOULD* be worthless, but memorizing openings would NOT be. Openings contain: Lines (Which must be memorized), Plans (Which must be memorized and are the KEY to the structure and understanding your openings, and Positional concepts (Which detail what advantages and disadvantages you and your opponent have [passed pawn vs superior knight, or any other combination of factors, etc.]) Openings contain the ENTIRE game of chess. You merely need to familiarize your self with positional concepts, tactics, and basic endgame theory before you should dive right into opening study. Openings are 100% key. I don't play in OTB tournaments too often, but I recently did after studying almost purely openings and I scored 2.5 out of 3, won the tournament and drew a 1900, defeated a 1750(Purely b/c of my opening prep, he was right inside of it.) Then defeated a 2010 In a game that wasn't even my opening! The thing is, I was thinking ABOUT the opening, the tactics, the plans, my positional factors. I assessed the position like an opening and determined where I should play, where HE should play, how to defend how to attack, how to best place my pieces and I completely outplayed him. Openings=Chess. Everybody that says they aren't who are they? What have they done? You don't find good players without an opening repertoire... They ALL have one, whether or not they admit it.
Openings are useful. Without them I would have to be good at endgame or middlegame and my rating would be less. But I am a 2300 uscf so I am happy
Openings are useful. Without them I would have to be good at endgame or middlegame and my rating would be less. But I am a 2300 uscf so I am happy
2300 uscf are you sure?
Sure - he's 2300 USCF.
Don't you know that you only need to be able to play book moves? After that it never matters what you do.
Most important are opening ideas and concepts bud. If you only know a few lines with 30 forced moves, then you're opponent plays one move out of book and you're screwed :p. Study games of gms and play like them :D
of course there are some forced lines which you need to know in certain variations
Wait a minute here -
I'm reading the start of the thread, and what are all these titled players here doing, agreeing with Portisch who said "the only purpose of opening play is to reach a playable middle game"?
Aren't we forgetting the corollary?
Meaning that if the purpose of the opening is to reach a playable middle game - it must mean that there are some other people (and they exist aplenty at the higher levels) who are working day and night to find lines which will not permit ME to reach a playable middle game if I play them!
So finally it becomes pretty tricky...
And then if I want to be as strong as these guys - I should also, from time to time, find lines that will not permit THEM to reach a playable middle game...
Not to mention all of the possible shades of "playable". Playable with a clear advantage to me, isn't the same as playable with a clear endgame advantage for Karpov against me...
I do agree that overstressing precise moves and variations, beyond a few lines, is quite a waste of time up to around 1700 or so. It's obvious. Maybe even 1800. But from that point and onwards, when playing against your peers, you do feel it when you get into an inconvenient situation - and you also feel frustrated if you could get an advantage but then messed up and only got something "playable".
Ideas and concepts are more useful then precise moves sometimes, and less useful than them some other times...
Even in openings where famously it's the "system" and not the "moves" (King Indian, Benoni, English opening, Reti, etc.) - you still see games where both parties knew the opening up to move 16, or 17, and then at move 24 they tell you "here they deviated from Dreev-Sokolov, Lake Panachawagawa 1979" or something - white prepared a shocking novelty on move 26 that would turn the evaluation around.
In any case, to feel good about playing the opening let's say that you need both - the precise moves AND the concepts/ideas - just to be on the safe side.
But all of this is really irrelevant if you're under 1800. You're making elementary mistakes in all phases of the game and concentrating on the opening will get you a playable position that you'll later surely spoil.
(Disclaimer: my level is around 2000 - and probably the master could say to me the same thing that I'm saying to the U1800. He may be right for all I know...)
just learn how u want to place your pieces behind your pawns. play lines that cut down on your opponent's options. for instance:
black's piece development is very quick and fluid here. above game and annotations not from the book Smerdon's Scandinavian, but just bought it, look forward to reading it, I lent a bit of my corr analysis actually and glad David used a bit of it and was very thorough in solving lines objectively but also noting some lines for their practical merits.
Wait a minute here -
I'm reading the start of the thread, and what are all these titled players here doing, agreeing with Portisch who said "the only purpose of opening play is to reach a playable middle game"?
Aren't we forgetting the corollary?
Meaning that if the purpose of the opening is to reach a playable middle game - it must mean that there are some other people (and they exist aplenty at the higher levels) who are working day and night to find lines which will not permit ME to reach a playable middle game if I play them!
So finally it becomes pretty tricky...
And then if I want to be as strong as these guys - I should also, from time to time, find lines that will not permit THEM to reach a playable middle game...
Not to mention all of the possible shades of "playable". Playable with a clear advantage to me, isn't the same as playable with a clear endgame advantage for Karpov against me...
I do agree that overstressing precise moves and variations, beyond a few lines, is quite a waste of time up to around 1700 or so. It's obvious. Maybe even 1800. But from that point and onwards, when playing against your peers, you do feel it when you get into an inconvenient situation - and you also feel frustrated if you could get an advantage but then messed up and only got something "playable".
If I was you solskytz I wouldn't even read this forum.
This forum was filled with Title Trolls.
Portisch said "the only purpose of opening play is to reach a playable middle game"?
Most of the title players were all agreeing with Portisch which is nothing more than an amusing hypocritical trolling feast.
Every title player on this forum got there title by letting the universe guide there piece movements in the opening.
They completely went on feelings no opening study or preparation of any sort.
They played tournements when the Earth Staff was facing south only.
It allowed the universe to flow through there finger tips.
Every move they played was an opening novelty.
I read what they said.
Than proceeded to laugh.
Than I ignored them all.
You can't learn from crazy people solskytz.
"... 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)
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.
Some hopeless patzers seem to enjoy it, though...