acknowledging some points above, i have to say prized or not prized tournament, either way i don't think it should reveal gambits and countergambits until the end of the game or if the game is analysed.
imo, you should look at it from casual point of view not from point of view of some kind of game masters because they're not most people who visit or play chess online.
so, yeah i wont re repeat itd be silly, just wanted to mention how i feel about the thing, myself.
That's the point, and I answered from that angle - I was also at a very low rating and still remember how difficult it was to play there. And it was from that perspective that I responded—it wouldn't have benefited me at all.
Well, at the level of "tell me the best opening for winning," it won't help much, and might even harm. Because the best opening is YOUR opening. It doesn't matter how strong it is, what matters is how well you UNDERSTAND it. And by understanding it, you can confuse your opponent and gain real advantage.
These same move suggestions without ideas can simply put you in a difficult position, where you don't even understand where you're headed even with great advantage.
At such a rating, there's only one piece of advice: experience. The more you lose, the more practical experience you gain, and that's the only thing that matters, because in a critical situation, it's the ability to analyze that will save you. Yes, you'll fall down, but at a certain point, a critical mass of understanding the basic principles of the game will carry you back up.
Can you figure out the scandal that occured when a player, in the middle of a prized Top chess players tournament in the early 20th Century (GM title existed not back then), won his game by promoting a pawn into a piece of his opponent's colour and delivering checkmate by it?
No, i don't, but want to know, what the game?