02 Aug 08
I gave up chess from about 1981 to 1984 or 5 and upon returning found that ECO codes had been introduced. I found it extremely annoying that the Scandinavian had been given only "B01". Apart from the obvious distinction between 2...Nf6 and 2...Qxd5 there are at least seven distinct variations. Anyone any views on this?
02 Aug 08
Originally posted by DrimachusAt least it wasn't given the B00 code.
I gave up chess from about 1981 to 1984 or 5 and upon returning found that ECO codes had been introduced. I found it extremely annoying that the Scandinavian had been given only "B01". Apart from the obvious distinction between 2...Nf6 and 2...Qxd5 there are at least seven distinct variations. Anyone any views on this?
02 Aug 08
Originally posted by DrimachusDon't pay too much attention to the codes. They aren't used so much (and not much use either) and pretty outdated.
I gave up chess from about 1981 to 1984 or 5 and upon returning found that ECO codes had been introduced. I found it extremely annoying that the Scandinavian had been given only "B01". Apart from the obvious distinction between 2...Nf6 and 2...Qxd5 there are at least seven distinct variations. Anyone any views on this?
02 Aug 08
Originally posted by DrimachusECO codes were developed in the late 1960s, or thereabouts, but took some time to become ubiquitous. It takes some time to become familiar with the codes, and the system upon which they are based.
I gave up chess from about 1981 to 1984 or 5 and upon returning found that ECO codes had been introduced. I found it extremely annoying that the Scandinavian had been given only "B01". Apart from the obvious distinction between 2...Nf6 and 2...Qxd5 there are at least seven distinct variations. Anyone any views on this?
They are essential to the organization of large databases.
I frequently refer to the Chess Archaeology website to translate ECO codes to familiar names, or the reverse. See http://www.chessarch.com/library/0000_eco/index.shtml
02 Aug 08
If Chess Openings never had names then we would have to use codes.
Can you imagine what the cover of a chess book would look like.
This Book is about the 1.e2-e4 e7-e5 2. f2-f4 d7-d5 3. e4xd5 e5-e4 4. d2-d3 Ng8-f6 5. d3xe4 Nf6xe4 6. Ng1-f3 Bf8-c5 7. Nb1-c3 Ne4xc3 8. b2xc3 O-O 9. Bf1-d3 Rf8-e8 variation of 1.e2-e4 e7-e5 2. f2-f4 opening.
I too hate those codes.
02 Aug 08
1 edit
Originally posted by Fat LadyWhat is that Opening...
Have you ever adopted an opening just because you liked the name? When I was young I thought the Meadow Hay opening sounded romantic and played it for a whole season, with predictable results.
The Dragon sounds cool but toooo sharp for me!!
Most openings with cool obscure names are not very good!
Dracula-Frankenstein sounds great!!
(I think it is a variation of the Vienna?)
02 Aug 08
Originally posted by DrimachusSearching for board position is useful, but does not always meet the need,
That's what annoyed me. Searching for a particular variation is very difficult as all B01 is jumbled up together. Fortunately Fritz/Shredder can search for the board position.
Each week when TWIC comes out, I find it useful to open the database, sort by ECO code, and then go through those in the openings I'm currently attentive to, such as C01-C19 (the French Defense) or E60-E99 (the KID). Searching for board position usually cuts out some of the key games that arrived there via transposition, or limits the search to particular lines.
It all depends on what you want to do. ECO revolutionized opening study. It is easy to ignore if you don't find it useful. I use it because it helps. Of course, I also shelled out $150 for a full set of the printed Encyclopedia of Chess Openings before I started using Fritz and ChessBase; this purchase was made back in the late 1990s when Chessmaster was my software, and I thought its database was Caissa's gift. CM's database is garbage compared to ChessBase, but I didn't know that when I was becoming intimate with ECO.
02 Aug 08
Originally posted by Fat LadyI always liked my knight behind the pawn "wall" at c4 and d4 so, without knowing any openings or theory, I became a Queen's Gambiteer. When I came back to chess I couldn't keep up with theory so adopted 'systems' - currently the KIA which I've used for a few years now.
Have you ever adopted an opening just because you liked the name? When I was young I thought the Meadow Hay opening sounded romantic and played it for a whole season, with predictable results.
02 Aug 08
Originally posted by najdorfslayeri noticed this too. all the boring names are good.. with all the cool or goofy sounding names are bad.
What is that Opening...
The Dragon sounds cool but toooo sharp for me!!
Most openings with cool obscure names are not very good!
Dracula-Frankenstein sounds great!!
(I think it is a variation of the Vienna?)
ever heard of the hillbilly attack? a nice way of saying lose tempo and space 😛