Hello,
I've been a chess player since the age of 12. I think I'm pretty good at developing my pieces and formulating a strategy to win a game. However, I have no idea about long standing openings and defenses (the only one I know is Queen's Gambit) I never felt it necessary to learn about these openings. Am I missing an aspect that would eventually improve my game?
Thanks.
http://home.mchsi.com/~progprinter2/
Learning concrete opening lines doesn't seem to be your best bet right now. That should come after you understand thoroughly all the principles that went in to discovering all of these moves. Looking over your couple of finished games, it seems as though you might be overestimating your abilities in the middlegame! 😀 I would concentrate on your tactical play, which basically means that you should be studying elementary combinations, and doing things like checking all the checks, captures, threats in a given position to make sure you're not allowing your opponent simple tactics as well. Later in the day I will take one of your games, and annotate it to show you what I mean in a little bit more depth.
To sum up, when your game isn't developed enough such that you aren't making simple tactical mistakes in the middlegame, nothing else matters! If you can't maintain material equality after the opening ends, it doesn't matter if you're up to date on all of the newest opening theory, since you'll just bungle the nice positions that you get because you don't understand what you're doing! A huge amount of tactics, some simple middlegame positional strategy, and a lot of beginning endgame theory should be what you're trying to wrap your head around at this point.
Hi,
I should have pointed out that my real weakness is playing black. I very rarely play back in the real world so I've grown so used to playing white that I can't get my head around looking at the board the opposite way.
But hey, that's why I joined this site; to learn a little.
Thanx!
I think opening moves should be memorized first. Why spend time improving my middle game when my opening makes me destined to lose? I played a master this weekend and played an inferior opening and almost drew, but due to time I got timed out. I played him a second game and he said if it werent my opening blunder I'd have played a damn good game.
He had a good take on how to learn chess too. He explains it as a big ball of knowledge to learn and you have to learn more to shrink that ball. He started by learning 6 moves deep into each opening that he would play. He then learned the 7th and 10th moves of each variation to help improve his chess. I would also say stray from using a database during online games. It only makes your opening play weaker. Look at the opening moves after the game.
You should learn each middle game plan for each opening you play. Its like trying to drive a car from washington to florida without a road map. Not very helpful.
I think opening moves should be memorized first. Why spend time improving my middle game when my opening makes me destined to lose?
I don't think this is even true for intermediate players, let alone beginners.
True, it is possible to lose a game in the opening, but once you get into the middle game, tactics and blunders are more important.
Looking at a couple of your games(including the one where you were white), all I can say is that if you think you know what you are doing, then you are playing people who don't have a clue.
Welcome to the world of the internet where the chess competition will be alot better than what you've been finding in real life.
Originally posted by kmac27I don't understand the logic of "I lost because of an opening blunder. You should study openings." And opening blunder is just a blunder that happened in the opening. You made a tactical or serious positional error and you were punished for it. Study some tactics! Here is one of his finished games, where he reaches a completely satisfactory position out of the opening and then bungles it to no end:
I think opening moves should be memorized first. Why spend time improving my middle game when my opening makes me destined to lose? I played a master this weekend and played an inferior opening and almost drew, but due to time I got timed out. I played him a second game and he said if it werent my opening blunder I'd have played a damn good game.
He had a ...[text shortened]... Its like trying to drive a car from washington to florida without a road map. Not very helpful.
1. Nf3
The fourth most common move, and a completely fine opening choice, controlling the e5 square and developing a piece.
1...Nc6!?
Uncommon but not bad. Black develops a piece towards the center, and hopes for possibly a Chigorin Defence after 2. d4 d5 3. c4 Bg4 or a double king pawn opening after 2. e4 e5.
2. Nc3!?
Very uncommon but not necessarily bad. That said, with this move White throws away his chances for any type of serious theoretical position or advantage. More common choices would be 2. c4, 2. e4, 2. d4, and 2. g3.
2...Nf6!?
Once again interesting and not bad. I would have thought about 2...e5 and 2...d5, although those moves most likely would tranpose to a similar position after an eventual ...Nf6 anyway.
3. e4
Finally White makes a claim in the center.
3...e5
Black does the same. This position is more commonly reached by 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Nc3 Nf6. It's been uncreatively named "The Four Knights Variation".
4. a3?!
White fears 4...Bb4 apparently (turns out he wants to play 5. b4), and so he stops it. However this move is completely unnecessary and just wastes time. The better, more well known moves are 4. Bb5 and 4. d4.
4...Bc5
Another sensical developing move.
5. b4
I'm not going to criticize this, but I think I would have again just played 5. Bb5.
5...Bb6
Duh.
6. d3!?
This looks weak. It's better, once again, to get the light squared bishop out before playing 6. d3, since it will be more active on b5 or c4 than on e2.
6...d6
Another fine natural developing move.
7. Be3
An okay move. 7. Be2 and 7. Na4!? (This move would be my choice) should both be considered as well.
7...Bf5??
What the hell is this? Now white is easily winning.
8. exf5 Qd7 9. g4?
Completely unnecessary, not to mention it just hangs a pawn. I would just play 9. Bxb6 axb6 10. g3 Qxf5 11. Bg2 +-. Whenever you're up material, it makes sense to trade down to an ending!
9...0-0-0 10. g5
This move looks okay if followed up correctly. It wasn't, however.
10...Ng4??
Another tactical error.
11. Bd2?
Once again, 11. Bxb6 axb6 is winning for White. Here, 12. h3! wins anothe rpiece.
11...Qxf5 12. Nh4???????
WHAT!?! STUDY SOME TACTICS!!! 😀
It should be noted that while White's position was equal, maybe slightly worse around moves 5 and 6, he was never losing, and this isn't what cost him the game. In fact, Black hung a piece and White was winning, despite some dubious opening decisions. Horrible tactical errors are what decide games at his rating level.
Hope this helps. Also, if you don't know how to read chess notation. There is help in the FAQ.
Originally posted by progprinterYou've only begun in here. This is a great place to learn. Think about it this way. You can play an unlimited number of games with nothing to risk. All you do is invest your time. I'd recommend this approach:
Hi,
I should have pointed out that my real weakness is playing black. I very rarely play back in the real world so I've grown so used to playing white that I can't get my head around looking at the board the opposite way.
But hey, that's why I joined this site; to learn a little.
Thanx!
1) Make different opening moves. Just experiment. See what happens.
2) Try to learn from each game, win or lose. That's the best way to improve. Just take a moment to see what you or the other player missed and add it to your skill base.
3) Use the games explorer to see how certain moves stack up statistically, if they happen to interest you (http://www.redhotpawn.com/gamesexplorer/)
4) Study the openings as you move, if you care to. Chess.com and Wiki have a lot of resources.
5) If you do use an opening book, use it to strengthen the openings that you know, once you develop some preferences and style
6) Ignore my advice. Look at my pathetic rating and overall record of giving advice and how I messed up my life so far and don't do anything I suggest.
P.S. #6 is the most important!
Originally posted by progprinterI know it's a hard lesson to learn, but absolutely necessary. playing against casual players is completely different from playing against serious players. everybody here trains, most probably daily. your games show you're a beginner, there's no doubt about it. the sooner you accept that, the sooner you can start working on improvement. you still need a huge amount of work in the basics.
wow. well, I appreciate your candor.
thanks
the first thing you need to do is start training tactics. preferably daily. try this site:
http://chess.emrald.net/
that's your main weakness by far, and until you work on that a couple of months nothing else will matter. absolutely nothing.
and start playing both colors equally. pick one opening for white, and two as black, against 1.e4 and 1.d4 respectively. learn a few moves, then keep playing those regularly to slowly build up understanding on those specific openings. it doesn't matter which you choose, only that you feel good in the positions. - but don't use excessive energy on openings, it'll be wasted until you get to 1800 or so.
tactics should become your middle name from now on, little else matters until you stop dropping material in every game.
Originally posted by progprinterNo problem.
wow. well, I appreciate your candor.
thanks
Do you know what my first chess thread's title?
"Getting my butt kicked playing chess on line"
I was bad even by the casual player's point of view. I used to hang pieces left and right with a low rating in the 600's at FICS playing blitz.
You'll get better. If you want to learn an opening, pick a basic one as white. Learn how you'll want to repsond to 1.e4 and 1.d4 as black and that will do for now. Study tactics and perhaps a little end games, but mostly tactics.
Good luck
I'm big on theory, and I do believe it is helpful, regardless of level. I think that studying openings can be done in conjunction with studying tactics as tactics forms the basis for everything that is chess.
My approach to openings is not to pre-study, but only after I face it for the first time in OTB play, whether it be a specific variation or entire opening branch. You will remember very clearly the problems (tactical, position etc) you tried to solve while at the board and this will prove invaluable when you crack that opening book. I find studying with no experience much less productive. Sure, doing this will cost you a few games to get up to speed but boy does it ever stick after that.
Programs like CT-ART are for tactics. However, most experienced players can look at the positions and tell you with some success which opening a "tactical" position was derived from. Of course some are not so clear, but some are obvious. Why should you care about this? Well, it's very good to know the types of positions that can arise out of certain openings and the inherent tactical possibilities in that particular position (i.e. Steinitz's belief). If you pay attention to this you will not only improve your tactical ability but also develop your awareness of the potential tactical blows and dangers that are common in certain openings/positions.