• 4 months ago

    IM DanielRensch

    Great idea, Shah_Maht

  • 4 months ago


    These types of misplayed openings are virtually the only ones I face by my opponents. I really appreciated this video and would suggest that there should be some 'simple' videos for each opening explaining why the main line is the main line and what each move achieves as well as what it does and how to react if your opponent does not play it. Thank you again Danny!

  • 20 months ago


    Excellent Video. Really enjoy the Rench commentary

  • 21 months ago


    Just wanted to write to say how much I enjoy your instructional videos, Danny. Entertaining AND informative is hard for some teachers, but you nail it. You nail it hard.

  • 3 years ago

    IM DanielRensch

    Interesting points John. I think part of my position on *style* has been misinterpreted by you. Or maybe I just made my comment too casually Tongue Out  without explaining the full "philosophy" behind my point (likely, as it was a Live Session Wink).

    Without going into it too deeply, I will say that once a player reaches the levels of 2400+ it is easier to see, and "justify" a style. You're right, I DO have a style and so do all those you mentioned. I think all players with that level of experience do start to naturally "prefer" certain positions over others. All your points prove that...

    BUT their knowledge of the game (which is vast) is enough that they are making more unbiased decisions than you realize Wink . So though you may only remember the great players for their "Tal-type wins" , he also won many games that didn't make it to the magazines with positional subtleties and no sacrifices based on intuition...

    BUT my point was more a teaching one for all the rest of the world! The majority of chess players below 2200 who *think* they have a *clearly developed style* are often simply justifying their "miscalculations" and "choice to avoid the right approach" because of their supposed style.

    • "I just prefer positions with the queens on the board..."
    • "I just like endgames better..."
    • "well, I'd much rather have my king on the opposite side of the board of his because I like to attack..."
    • "I like trading my bishops for knights..." (someone just said that the other day to me)
    • OR I'll even go as far as saying that "I just don't like fater time controls..." is a "personality / style weakness.

    The point is that before someone has reached a high level (in my opinion 2400+ and at least 2200+) they need to be willing to "work on themselves" to "overcome" their style choices. NOT avoid them!

    If a player struggles thinking quickly, they need to work on it! If a player isn't comfortable with queens off the board, work on it! If a player is changing his calculation because he just desperately doesn't want to give up a bishop for a knight, he / she needs to work on it!

    That's my point.

    Your points are excellent and true. BUT honestly, even at that high level, and even with people "choosing lines that suit their style" (which we all do) it still doesn't mean I'm wrong! We must always work on being unbiased and trying to let calculation and evaluations guide us, not pre-conceived preferences...

    Thanks and I hope that helps clarify my comment and position on it!


  • 3 years ago


    hold on for one more day was definitely early 90s. 90 or 91.

  • 3 years ago


    I find really interesting what you say about style being an illusion. In some way, I completely agree with you. You cannot decide you have a certain style and therefore you must attack the king in every position or grab material in every position and so on. You need to play what the position calls for. However, there's a deeper sense of what style might mean. For example, when you have multiple opportunities (like you had in your game at a certain point) to change the position in a certain way, there's something personal about you as a player that makes you choose. You didn't go for the pawn sacrifice when you didn't see anything concrete. However,  the position was blowing up and your opponent's king was in the center. Intuitively, some players might go for that kind of position without calculating. Do you think Shirov (in his good times) or Morozevich see "something concrete" every time they start an attack? It's a fact that Shirov's intuition was much more powerful than his ability to calculate. However, his intuition was especially powerful in attacking positions. Wouldn't that resemble something like style? You went for a more positional advantage instead of a pawn sacrifice or an exchange sacrifice. Did you see something concrete there?

    You say style is weakness. In this era of engines everyone feels like they're a computer and must play the perfect moves, regardless of their style. Well, are you sure Rybka agrees with you in the decision of not going for the attack? Of course you're not, but you prefer to risk less and play positionally. I've been watching your live sessions and I've noticed that's actually your style. You don't go for sacrifices unless you see something concrete. You don't like to complicate the position when there's "no need" to do it. Players like Alekhine or Kasparov went for complicated positions almost every time they had the chance.   You'd rather take a positional advantage that guarantees you won't lose (but maybe draw). Of course you're able to attack, but that's because you're a tactical prodigy, not because you have intuitive confidence in your attack. Don't tell me style isn't a factor there. A player like Shirov or Tal would have taken some of the positions you've refused without even thinking. I might be wrong, but I think you're a kind a player that is more similar fo Fischer than Tal. Curiously Fischer thought the same thing you do about style.

  • 4 years ago


    hey what about the joke? you said you would tell us the joke...

  • 4 years ago


    Hahaha, Honey badger doesn't care. When honey badger is hungry, he eats.

  • 5 years ago


    "Listen to your pawns"  

    That's whassup.

  • 5 years ago


    I actually do have a little bird that sits on my shoulder when I play. Unfortunately, he's only around 1400 uscf....

  • 5 years ago


    I always pronounced it el-eck-hine- It's like Kasparov - some say long a and some short.

  • 5 years ago


    Who cares whether Alekhine is pronounced Alyokheen or Alekheen. The main problem is American pronounciation Alikain? Lol 

    I am Russian btw and always pronounced it as Alyokheen.

  • 5 years ago



  • 5 years ago


    All of your videos are very good - but for me, this was your best so far.

  • 5 years ago

    FM gauranga

  • 5 years ago

    IM DanielRensch

    Yeah, Bf3 followed by immediately using the e4-square was much better Frown...

    Thanks guys


  • 5 years ago


    sammj is right, after ...g6, bf3  is better than be2

    still, i loved this game.  I saw Bh5 too, but really liked c5, whuch had much more power because black was not castled

  • 5 years ago


    On form Danny excellent game!! Easy to digest content it's amazing listening to your thoughts whilst you prepare your next move(s) you must be a very good coach!

  • 5 years ago


    Thanks for another great video! Your explanations during these live sessions really help to reinforce the ideas you discuss in your other videos, e.g. pawn structures and other positional ideas such as getting a pawn to e5 and kicking the f6 knight.

Back to Top

Post your reply: