Yes, such is a consequence of the Soviet revolution in chess. Most players are expected to memorize VAST ammounts of variations, instead of finding the move themselves.
Reuben Fine's Ideas Behind the Chess Opening is a good start.Problem is it was published in 1943 and last "updated" in 1989.
A clear example of the pitfall is that n tis analsys of the Sicilian it claims that black should not play ...e5. Now, many of us know that e5 is a strong move that is a key part of the Najdorf system so...you decide.
Originally posted by c guy1The English may be fun in general, but if your opponent plays the Symmetrical Variation, don't count on it.
I currently have the Complete Opening Book 14th ed and I noticed the english. It looks like tons of fun but these stupid opening books never explain themselves, any suggestions on where I can learn the "why" to the moves, not just what lines to memorizeðŸ˜
Originally posted by exigentskywhy not....the symmetrical is tons of fun...u put ur king safe in the corner, and then attack while he is still working on doing the same...and to the first response about sicilian...what r you talking about? This is the English, as played by white, not the Sicilian, as played by black
The English may be fun in general, but if your opponent plays the Symmetrical Variation, don't count on it.
It could be better, but Tony Kosten's book The Dynamic English gives decent explanations. I also own a book that only covers only the symetric variations which is even better. It is by Everyman chess and I love their format.
Introduce a main line/variation then give 2+ critical ideas for both white and black followed by 10+ sample games.
ill look into it....but one question? does it teach you the strategic why? or does it just tell you a response if they do something else? is it an opening book with tons of lines? or does it have the major lines listed with the different strategic and tactical values, never actually going down to much further than 15-20th move...thats what i want. I am a horrible memorizer, give me the ideas, not the lines.....but...this thread is about the opening itself, not books...so keep some ideas coming on good lines and WHY they work, not just a other lines to prove why.
The idea in The Dynamic English is this: You can play
1.c4
2. g3
3. Bg2
4. Nc3 reasonably well against anything (you may have to play cxd4 or something in there but the basic setup is the same). From there you can play e3, Ne2, 0-0 then either f4 or d4 based on the position or head straight for a botvinik set up (c4, d3 and e4 with Nc3, Ne2, g3 and Bg2). The trickiest line tend to be the ones against the slav. Where white actually gambits his c pawn.
Originally posted by exigentskyI said "reasonably well" and I think a draw qualifies as playing resonably well. Second, that was by no means a forced draw. There are a few moves in there that I question (there were no obious blunders).
Checkout this game Game 1680211 and then say repeat that. 😉
First of all, the fact that you accepted a draw, your king had free reign over the king side, his was trapped in behind your f pawn, you could have used your king and d rook (possibly your knight coulda have helped a little too) to push one of the outside pawns.... secondly...all your attacks throughout the game never had any real strenght, you just pushed little tactics at him the whole time. You need to rally your forces in one big push, your were always creating diffent ideas, at one point u were pushing kingside, next queen, next up the middle, eighter blow up the middle and let hell break lose, attack the queen side and try and force a pawn, you go for the throat. Secondly, my origonal sight of blunders came from criticing white, he didnt play nearly dynamic enough. If your oponant plays the symetrical, he needed to attack and make a breaking combination, not just let you puch him around, he's a 1900, he should have known that...