Is it just me, or is it kinda surprising how many people with decent rankings (1300+) don't know the correct continuations to certain openings? It makes me feel like I've wasted a bunch of time studying openings when I should've been just studying tactics and endgame. Any thoughts on this? For the record, I haven't just studied openings purely to memorize the moves. I try to learn why certain moves are made (i.e. why black doesn't take whites pawn right away in the Petroff defense)
lmao......OWNED!!!!
Ok first of all I have improved over the last few games. Second of all, my whole problem is I play at work when I'm really distracted. Most games that I've lost are because I haven't been paying enough attention and blundered a piece or two away or didn't notice an easy mate. They're all games that I would do much better at if they were actually in person.
Anywho....anyone care to actually respond to the question I asked rather than hurl unnecessary insults?
No player(under 1800) follows main lines...if we did then it is just a memory game.
And anyone below 1800 will not benefit from "openings study"
Yes we may learn a few lines...but we(under 1800) won't know why we are playing the moves we memorized.
And also...just because your opponent didn't play the "main line" or "best move"...doesn't mean his/her move is wrong.
Originally posted by stockton1984Well, I think tactics study should come first.
Is it just me, or is it kinda surprising how many people with decent rankings (1300+) don't know the correct continuations to certain openings? It makes me feel like I've wasted a bunch of time studying openings when I should've been just studying tactics and endgame. Any thoughts on this? For the record, I haven't just studied openings purely to mem ...[text shortened]... moves are made (i.e. why black doesn't take whites pawn right away in the Petroff defense)
Also, for an improving player tactics are fun & not dry like endgame study is.
You're in the States, so should be able to get this little gem fairly easily:
http://tinyurl.com/24ksw7
It's perfect for a 1000+ looking for better results fast.
If you study tactics repeatedly, then just use the gamesexplorer database or better still one of the online db's you should be well set.
Worry about endgame study when you eventually start having problems checkmating or winning by material gain during the middlegame because your quality of opponent has improved!
Originally posted by chessisvanityexcellent points on both posts'
under 1800.....all you need to focus on is controlling the center.
and winning of course.
Learning openings is as much about tactics as any other aspect of the game. To say someone doesn't follow the "proper" opening routine is to be a bit naive. There are thousands and thousands of "book" openings, Not taking the usual route very often gets your opponent off there game.Obviously it has worked well against you (by your elo).
Well again, most of my losses are due to obvious blunders that I've been too distracted to see at the time.
What I'm mainly referring to is not someone following strict book in the sicilian, carokann, etc.......but just making definite errors in openings. For example, the Petroff example I gave before, The error in the Ruy Lopez exchange variation where white takes blacks pawn immediately after the exchange.....should openings not at least be studies to the extent of not falling into obvious traps that at first sight look correct?
Well again, most of my losses are due to obvious blunders that I've been too distracted to see at the time.
What I'm mainly referring to is not someone following strict book in the sicilian, carokann, etc.......but just making definite errors in openings. For example, the Petroff example I gave before, The error in the Ruy Lopez exchange variation where white takes blacks pawn immediately after the exchange.....should openings not at least be studies to the extent of not falling into obvious traps that at first sight look correct?
Originally posted by stockton1984the difference between a good player, and a great player, is the number of mistakes they make.
Well again, most of my losses are due to obvious blunders that I've been too distracted to see at the time.
What I'm mainly referring to is not someone following strict book in the sicilian, carokann, etc.......but just making definite errors in openings. For example, the Petroff example I gave before, The error in the Ruy Lopez exchange variation ...[text shortened]... t be studies to the extent of not falling into obvious traps that at first sight look correct?
Capablanca (paraphrase) says that openings are not about traps, but about establishing control of the board and developing your pieces.
I think one can infer that you should play to win, and not play to not loose
Originally posted by stockton1984stockton....you are playing people rated 1200......that should answer your questions.
Well again, most of my losses are due to obvious blunders that I've been too distracted to see at the time.
What I'm mainly referring to is not someone following strict book in the sicilian, carokann, etc.......but just making definite errors in openings. For example, the Petroff example I gave before, The error in the Ruy Lopez exchange variation ...[text shortened]... t be studies to the extent of not falling into obvious traps that at first sight look correct?
Just win....and when you get to 1400 you start to see less errors by your opponents.
I feel that you are saying everyone should know all the little traps and opening nuances.....if that were so i wouldn't play chess.
You shouldn't complain......your opponents play normal.....if you played me i'd show you moves that would make you think i was a beginner....then i'd use your face to mop the floor cause i'm 1400 tactically.....worry about openings at the 1800 level.
Originally posted by chessisvanityooh so are you prepared to prove that? Will you accept a challenge game for me? Unrated if you wish 😀
stockton....you are playing people rated 1200......that should answer your questions.
Just win....and when you get to 1400 you start to see less errors by your opponents.
I feel that you are saying everyone should know all the little traps and opening nuances.....if that were so i wouldn't play chess.
You shouldn't complain......your opponents ...[text shortened]... face to mop the floor cause i'm 1400 tactically.....worry about openings at the 1800 level.
You're a 1.e4...e5 player as black so you're off to a good start.
Find out about the variations of some of the openings you'll meet because you can set yourself back badly if you blunder early on.
For instance in recent loss Game 4358079 you're playing the black side of the exchange version of the Ruy Lopez.
1.e4...e5
2.Nf3...Nc6
3.Bb5...a6
4.Bxc6
and 4...bxc6 is a slight mistake.
I know it's counter-intuitive because everyone always says "capture toward the center" & "maintain pawns on d & e-files if possible" but here is an exception which proves the rule.
The isolated pawn on a6 can be a pain, you have an immobile pawn on c7 & it can be difficult to develop your pieces without first making more pawn moves, such as
5.0-0...d6
6.Nc3...Nf6
7.d4...exd4
8.Qxd4...c5
9.Qd3
Better in the exchange Ruy is:
4...dxc6
Then if your opponent mistakenly plays
5.Nxe5?! (as he may well have in your game) you have
5...Qd4!
which is a superb start for black. Just check any database.
This also goes against the basic principle of not moving your Q too soon, but if your opponent errs, then sometimes rules can be bent!
Best play is probably now
6.Nf3...Qxe4+
7.Qe2...Qxe2+!
8.Kxe2...Nf6
In this Game 4335535 you're white & playing against the rather dull but solid Pirc defence (for a moment!)
1.e4...d6
2.d4...d5? this loses a tempo. Normal is
2...Nf6
3.Nc3...g6
After 2...d5? the simple
3.exd5...Qxd5
4.Nc3 attacks the Q whilst developing at the same time, gaining another tempo.
4...Qa5
This looks like a fairly common line of the Scandinavian, but white has an extra move in hand
5.Nf3
Big lead in development