The game of chess is destroyed

By sick guys who look up openings online and think they've accomplished something by playing standard moves. 

The game is a joke and there is no respect in it. 

It is no longer a game of intellectualism except at the top level. 

Any average chess player including myself is nothing special. 

Playing openings with internet assistance (for correspondance) is part of the way chess has adapted. Now I, personally, don't but I don't see a reason to complain about those who do...

Here we go again...

Whee!

*turns on ACDC* 

Memorization of openings is a problem that exists on the highest levels. That's why Bobby Fischer invented Random Chess. If you want to play online and not worry about someone using the Opening Explorer play only 960 Random Chess games. Also lets try to get 960 played live.

@ pullin

Perhaps this may help

The only thing that matters is natural talent with this game

Warlord

Final Wars

www.finalwars.com

Fact is, there's not much chess left in chess.

What you think of as a creative, innovative move, is actually just a less common move, according to chessbase database. That retarded move you chose to play on move 6 just to be 'edgy' and different, actually has a name and is in the ECO.

At move 30 in your game, chances are very high that it's been played 10,000 times before.

Uncomfortable truth is that chess is really just a memory exercise. Calculation and deep thought is for solving chess puzzles. In tournament play with time controls, its all about the memory and how many side-lines you've memorized.

If you want to study chess, study the endgame. You can memorize your way through the opening and middle game. 

random chess will never catch on because it removes the predictability required to become a professional. There is no less memory component and more calculation component. It will be popular at the hobby/kids level, but anyone who wants to 'get good' will stick to classical chess where they can memorize stuff in order to be a professional.

Randomness? Why are there poker professionals, Backgammon professionals then?

I harken yee to forebode thee this message

Aye

Chess is no more, it hath been destroyed

The game that thee play is a destroyed game and thee games are merely shenanigans in a city of ruins

A game of chess is nothing but children playing in city of ruins

i agree every time ive ever played 2.KF6 they have played 2.NC6. even though there is many very good ways to respond they just dont try new stuff

There are over 8.6 * 10^17 perfectly logical chess games by move 30.

In fact, even if there have been 100 billion chess games, the chance that your exact game has been played before approaches very close to zero by move 18.

This is all assuming that there are only 4 "good" moves at every position, and that the only opening options are c4, d4, and e4.

In reality it's probably closer to 5 or 6 standard responses to any given position. That would be approaching 0 odds by 15 moves and 14 moves respectively.

You cannot memorize the game of chess. The harder you try, the longer you will stagnate at your current rating.

Success at chess is still mostly about tactics and endgames, NOT about memorizing openings.  Most players below expert level quickly deviate from opening theory, in which case memorized lines won't be much help.

The dramatic statement that chess is dead/spent/destroyed is simply not true for most players.  Most of my games are so strange, that there is a reasonable chance that many of my positions have never occurred before in this universe.

Just study the games of Morphy, who played when there was so little theory that he invented 3...a6! in the Ruy Lopez (after 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5).  If Morphy is the only theory you know, and you begin to see the patterns he saw de novo, you too can be a master today.  I promise.

You can take your opponent off book bt going off book first yourself.

Then the result of the game will just depend on the relative aggregate of mistakes each player made.

Unless some had created a 32 man endgame tablebase and memorised it in its entirety of course... 

In that case, they might still have weaknesses in the middlegame!

It's true, they might not understand anything about the middlegame... but they'd just have to recall which move was best in any position with 32 or less men... 

Thats one of the great things about the game.  Its not solved, so every game is new.