I've been using a chess database to help with my openings for about six months now, and I was wondering where other database users decide to stop relying on the database and start playing for themselves. Lots of databases I know of can take a player very deep into a game (providing obviously that someone had played the same moves at some point somewhere...), but I personally would never follow a game any more than maybe 13 or 14 moves deep, and that's only with very common openings like the Sicilian, which can lead to long textbook openings. I just don't think it does me any favors to follow the moves of some GM or IM without learning anything about the position for myself. Almost as bad as using a chess engine, one would think.
Anyone else have any thoughts on the subject?
-Kev
Originally posted by seraphimvultureI'll play book moves if I get the chance on two conditions.
I've been using a chess database to help with my openings for about six months now, and I was wondering where other database users decide to stop relying on the database and start playing for themselves. Lots of databases I know of can take a player very deep into a game (providing obviously that someone had played the same moves at some point somew ...[text shortened]... ng a chess engine, one would think.
Anyone else have any thoughts on the subject?
-Kev
1) I can see why the move is played. No use playing moves I don't understand. It'll just get me into trouble later.
2) Once it gets down to a few games in a given position you have to be careful as many of the games may be wins but in fact were lost at some point or other. Inaccuracies later in the game often invalidate any conclusions you draw from the statistics.
Once I understood that database use was allowed at RHP, I took advantage of www.chesslive.de to broaden my opening repertoire. I play too many games to just vary from 1. e4 / d4 and I find it incredibly boring to play the same positions over again. Once I get familiar with a new opening I tend to remember the first 5 or 6 moves and deliberately don't go back to the database to check up on them, this often means making a mistake and if this happens I look again later to see what I did wrong and try to avoid that blunder in the future.
This method has increased my enjoyment of chess in the time I've been playing at RHP (2 years in September) and I'm really pleased to have learnt different openings like the Polish (1. b4), the Bird (1. f4), the Benko (1. g3) and various black defences. I still play too many games to stick slavishly to these and just for the hell of it often try something totally random, especially against 2000+ players to spice things up a bit.
Apart from openings I have tried to use www.chesslive.de to get an early positional advantage, especially against higher rated opponents, but as XanthosNZ says, it's not always a sound idea to follow moves that you don't fully understand just because they have been played before. The other thing I have found is that following a database will only get you so far, I think my recent game against David Tebb went out of book around move 12. I never bother to use the database for end games, I prefer to work it out for myself, sometimes even when they appear lost, as I want to strengthen my understanding of end game play.