The problem with studying master games

Sort:
BlackSquareBishop

Ive noticed after studying typical openings and master games, I feel excited about using those openings. But my hearts sinks when i see my opponent deviate from the line with a seemingly stupid move, and I am at a loss for how to exploit it. Sometimes i will go into game explorer, and I cant find examples of what my opponent did, and I am unable to find how to exploit their seemingly pointless moves.

 

Has anyone ever had these feelings? How to fix! How to fix!? 


peterkirby

This is very true. This is why nothing beats playing a lot of games with an opening and finding the variations that come out of them yourself, going over the games and finding the weak points, etc. Especially with players who don't know the theory, things go out of book quickly.

This is also why memorizing lines is probably a bad idea. A better way to understand an opening is to ask of each move-- "what does it do? why wasn't this other move better? what threat could it make to which the opponent has to respond?" etc. Especially when your opponent makes a "seemingly pointless move," very often it will in fact be mostly pointless (there's probably a goal in mind but the opponent might not get to execute it in time or you have an easy-enough response). For these cases, you should have a "null strategy" in mind, the kind of thing you plan to do over the next 5 or so moves in case your opponent doesn't do anything radical. Often this involves setting up your pieces such that they are in position to unleash an unopposable combination leading to material loss or mate.

The word "unopposable" is in there to indicate that the other player can't thwart your plans. Often it's better to keep moving pieces into position and shoring up weaknesses, eliminating counter-play before unleashing the combination. A plan that can be thwarted often just leaves you off-balance and ripe for counter-attack. 


GreenLaser
If your opponent does not play the moves you have studied, those moves may not be pointless. Your job is to continue to make moves that do not violate the rules of chess, meaning the general principles. The moves you had planned may or may not be affected by your opponent's deviations. For example, if after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 you were expecting 3...Bc5 or 3...Nf6 but 3...h6 (not too sensible) or 3...Be7 (making more sense) was played, you simply cannot play 4.Ng5, but 4.d4 is fine.
BlackSquareBishop

i read a great quote in a chess book that says that chess is both a science and an art. Its that creativity that you must have to work your opponent, and make him think that the move he made was his idea, while in reality it was your idea for him to make that move.

    Incredible, beautiful... chess! 


chuckward
GreenLaser wrote: If your opponent does not play the moves you have studied, those moves may not be pointless. Your job is to continue to make moves that do not violate the rules of chess, meaning the general principles. The moves you had planned may or may not be affected by your opponent's deviations. For example, if after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 you were expecting 3...Bc5 or 3...Nf6 but 3...h6 (not too sensible) or 3...Be7 (making more sense) was played, you simply cannot play 4.Ng5, but 4.d4 is fine.

Well said.


phishcake5

Very well said PK.

Edit: Wasn't trying to upstage you with my "very" chucky (hope you don't mind me calling you chucky) we posted at the same time.


vagamundo
agree 100%!!!   That's why the study of chess is not about following the steps of somebody else's game...   It's about learning the best ways to counter attack, get out of trouble & be more effective.
chuckward
phishcake5 wrote:

Very well said PK.

Edit: Wasn't trying to upstage you with my "very" chucky (hope you don't mind me calling you chucky) we posted at the same time.


Not a prob


stormcrown

"If your opponent does not play the moves you have studied, those moves may not be pointless."

There's a guy at the club who specifically plays whacked moves to take players out of their book.  His off-road moves usually have a nasty tactical edge. Sometimes he goes full cheese with it to quickly knock down C and low B players.  

 


GreenLaser
phishcake5, did you know that fishcakes are made, not born?
phishcake5
tonydal wrote: Constantly!  That's why I find opening books are often pretty much useless.

I just don't understand how you can say that.  Its like saying spiritual leaders are of no worth; yes we have to find the best way to walk our personal path but how invaluable is their counsel!


phishcake5
GreenLaser wrote: phishcake5, did you know that fishcakes are made, not born?

Same as greenlasers ay;)  I'm trying to make the best little phishcakes I can by the way.  Not anywhere near your league yet though GreenLaser:)


GreenLaser

The phishcake5 take on spiritual leaders and greenlasers is enlightening. Opening books can be read if they are enjoyed. Aside from specific lines that may not come up, there are general principles, planning, tactics and other themes. If there are specific positions a player is seeking, opening books should help in what may seem an indirect way - tranpositions. The same positions can be reached from numerous move orders and openings. Sometimes they are exactly the same; sometimes they are a tempo or two off or with the other side on the move.


wormrose
Welcome BlackSquareBishop to the wonderful world of chess opening books. I have experienced what you describe many many times. It all looks so beautiful and logical in the books. But then your opponent makes a move that's not in the book or any of the Dbases - so you assume it's a bad move. And it probably is. So - what do you do now? This is what separates the GMs from the rest of us. I've spent countless hours studying endgame books and then most my games end about the time the endgame starts. But it helps to know those things - they are instructional as general principles. And those are the kind of books I like the most - those that teach general principles. Like Kmoch's "Pawn Power". Or "Simple Chess" which teaches positional play. Good luck to you. Keep playing!
phishcake5
BlackSquareBishop, John Watson's series: Mastering the Chess Openings (both of which I've added to my library and will be adding the 3rd volume when it is released) deal with just these sorts of straying issues, and to my novice understanding Watson has done a great job of trying to teach understanding of common positions general utility so that we can gain a better understanding of what to do in such cases, as he has done with cross pollination, where openings morph into each other. 
goldendog

One of the "independent roads" to chess improvement is playing guess-the-move with one side of an annotated master game. Not only do you pick up on patterns but as you get better (stronger) and guess more of those moves, all those moves you come up with are all yours, yours alone, and not from any book or guru.

If you can't find an author you trust then the above will do fine if you work hard and long. 


ADK

Well maybe you can find your own variations to exploit their "Pointless Move"...

With chess you can experiment a lot with different moves. ===>> ===>> ===>>

Therefore you come up with an array of combinations in your favor!!! 

ADK


littleman
I like studying master games that are anotated so at least u get the idea of what they were thinking at the time rather then going; what the heck was that move for? and why are they playing it this way? Studying masters of any kind are worth while and worth trying to emulate in my opinion u just have to know when u should go your own way and use your simple common sense too....Cool
Philosophical
The point of studying masters is to glean principles of good play.  That way, whether the opponent is strong or foolish, you are empowered to play from a position of sound principles.
GreenLaser
littleman wrote: I like studying master games that are anotated so at least u get the idea of what they were thinking at the time rather then going; what the heck was that move for? and why are they playing it this way? Studying masters of any kind are worth while and worth trying to emulate in my opinion u just have to know when u should go your own way and use your simple common sense too....

This is a good way to study. Question the positions you find interesting. The process of questioning will become a habit that helps you against a real opponent.