where did I say people here were at that level ? i'm sorry you could not get my point, it's probably because of the level you are at :(
And what you state about my Poisoned Pawn is just your imagination.
I'm off anyway, you guys are truly weird. Seems you can only argue.
I'll say it again. I didn't say the people in this thread were at that level you sick ignorant moron.
I never said I agreed with studying openings. In fact I don't. Learning to play openings is about learning how to make threats and capitalize on early mistakes. I was lucky, I had a natural knack for openings and a very good teacher. This combination made me an openings, middlegame, and ending monster because I always found an advantage. I recently joined the chess club at NYU, and even there, in a variation of the Scandinavian I had never played before(The Qd6 line), I managed to stick it to a 2400 rated player in a blitz game with a cleverly intuitive pawn sacrifice. I'll try to see if I remember the game, because I remember the critical moment and winning his queen.
I never said I agreed with studying openings. In fact I don't. Learning to play openings is about learning how to make threats and capitalize on early mistakes. I was lucky, I had a natural knack for openings and a very good teacher. This combination made me an openings, middlegame, and ending monster because I always found an advantage. I recently joined the chess club at NYU, and even there, in a variation of the Scandinavian I had never played before(The Qd6 line), I managed to stick it to a 2400 rated player in a blitz game with a cleverly intuitive pawn sacrifice. I'll try to see if I remember the game, because I remember the critical moment and winning his queen.
I completely agree with Reb.
It's clear that your brain doesn't work.
For the answer to all your problems, check out the man in the mirror.
I wouldn't say the opening is "dribble" necessarily but I really don't think it's the "most important" part of chess. I think tactics are the most important. What if you go into a game against someone and all of a sudden, "O my god! They've taken the queen out early!" There goes all of your opening studies completely down the drain. You need to be able to play according to the situation at hand as opposed to just simply focusing on "book moves". I'm not saying book moves are not important--I think they help with preparation, however, openings have a tendency to diverge and transpose into other openings. I've played the Traxler counter-attack on here a few times and I think both games the game transposed from a Russian opening to an Italian two knights defense to the Traxler. I simply played it because I've seen it played before and have studied as to what to do in the situations presented one move at a time as an anti-Fried liver player.
Enter-The-Tuna is clearly an English snob.
If I was not born, I would not have the opportunity to improve my middle age and old age situation!
Strengthen your weakest side where your opponent can attack against you. If your weakest side is openings, practise those. If your weakest side is middle game, practise it more, if your weakest side is at the end, try to be better there. So it depends.
I think it's time we revived this thread, seeing as its antithesis hit the front page. I have some thoughts on the matter.
A) The opening is definitely important.
B) The ending is definitely important
C) Which is more important?
D) As someone who tends to play his openings with less accuracy than his middelgames and endings, it's hard to say I have an ubiased opinion. I'll pass it off to someone else.
thanks for correcting me, but at that level, it only takes one move. Of course you knew that was what i meant, no way could you be so obtuse! to illustrate the point further to guys at your level whose only interest appears to be thinking you are smarter than other posters, i used the Poisoned Pawn variation to routinely beat opponents in tournaments that were rated 300 or more points above me. I'm sure you will have a ready rebound for that also though.