In another thread, Hypermodern Theory, Zander 88 wrote, "Some hypermodern ideas are correct, others not. Some classical ideas are correct, some are not." Wow, this is news to me. I would love to see a list of principles, hypermodern or classical, that are not correct. Now THAT would be interesting.
Originally posted by basso In another thread, Hypermodern Theory, Zander 88 wrote, "Some hypermodern ideas are correct, others not. Some classical ideas are correct, some are not." Wow, this is news to me. I would love to see a list of principles, hypermodern or classical, that are not correct. Now THAT would be interesting.
i don't really understand why it needs it's own thread, but look at the kings gambit. Computers such as fritz have studied this and found it to be a fairly bad opening. Don't challenge other people's theories just because they say something unusual, it happens too often on here.
Originally posted by ih8sens i don't really understand why it needs it's own thread, but look at the kings gambit. Computers such as fritz have studied this and found it to be a fairly bad opening. Don't challenge other people's theories just because they say something unusual, it happens too often on here.
I have not challenged anyone's theories -- I was just surprised to hear that there are chess principles which turn out to be not correct, and I wanted to know what such principles might be. OK, I've looked at the KG -- what does that tell me about any chess principles which in the end are not correct? I was looking for a list, like:
Originally posted by basso I have not challenged anyone's theories -- I was just surprised to hear that there are chess principles which turn out to be not correct, and I wanted to know what such principles might be. OK, I've looked at the KG -- what does that tell me about any chess principles which in the end are not correct? I was looking for a list, like:
Incorrect Chess Principles:
1)
2)
i don't think he was chalenging principles as much as he was openings, whether modern, hypermodern, or classic
You are right in that some ideas are just not very good. overprotection anyone?
But, don't get carried away. All ideas have merit (usually), just that some are much more effective in some positions than others. That is why you must find out which is best. For example, in a complex position, you are going to have a ton of ideas bombard you. Centralize the knight. Activate the rooks. Blockade his pawn. Suppress his counterplay. Open his position up with a bishop sacrifice.
In this position all these ideas will have significance, but some more than others. You must hit upon the right plan that is going to maximise your chances, or reduce his. Only way to do this is calculate variations and evaluate the resulting position.
Don't take that statement too literally. What I was trying to convey is that some ideas may be wrong in such and such position. And not necessarily wrong, but less effective.
I'm wondering if the operative term here is "application." Not every principle applies in every situation. But to say that a principle doesn't apply (in a situation) is very different from saying it is "not correct."
Originally posted by basso I'm wondering if the operative term here is "application." Not every principle applies in every situation. But to say that a principle doesn't apply (in a situation) is very different from saying it is "not correct."
You are right. The theories of center control, are very much focused on the opening stage. I think they might be applicable in the middle or endgame, but you will see these ideas mainly discussed with the opening phase.
About the part with ideas. They are a ton of them, so you really have to classify them to get a better understanding. For example, tactical ideas and strategic ideas. And then that could be further divided. These ideas are without a doubt present in all the phases of a game. So I would say some are more or less effective than others in certain positions. The only way you will know is by concrete calculation.
All I vant to hear iz ze truth. 🙂 Thanks for the clarification. What else I would love to hear is a list of the hypermodern openings. I have learned to stay away from playing them, as they seem to be beyond my current ability. So far, I have learned to avoid playing the KID and the Sicilian. What are the others? Thanks.
I'm might of missed some, not thinking too well tonight 😕
They aren't really more difficult than classical openings. At this point there is a lot of theory to any opening you play. I say experiment with the openings and then choose something you are comfotable with.
If hypermodern openings are not any more difficult than the classical ones, then why am I lost when playing them? I have *so much* difficulty when playing them. I can't seem to get any "traction." Whereas with openings like the Ruy, Giuocco Piano, QG, though I am hardly a master at them (not at all), I have little trouble playing them.
Originally posted by basso If hypermodern openings are not any more difficult than the classical ones, then why am I lost when playing them? I have *so much* difficulty when playing them. I can't seem to get any "traction." Whereas with openings like the Ruy, Giuocco Piano, QG, though I am hardly a master at them (not at all), I have little trouble playing them.
It's less obvious where to put your pieces in hypermodern openings - and if you get it wrong, they just trip over each other, and get rolled back by a wave of enemy pawns. This might be the difference you struggle with.
26 Mar '07 01:56
Incorrect Principles
Back to Top