Only Chess
01 Aug 05
01 Aug 05
I have never been one to study openings, middle games, or for that
matter end games. I have cracked a book or two, but never devoted
myself to really grabbing what was in them.
Should someone attempt to find a set of openings according to the
style of player they think they are; instead of looking at those
openings that they seem to run into more often than not?
Kelly
01 Aug 05
Originally posted by KellyJayYes. You should find openings that suit your style and then learn to transpose offbeat openings of other players into lines that you're familiar with.
I have never been one to study openings, middle games, or for that
matter end games. I have cracked a book or two, but never devoted
myself to really grabbing what was in them.
Should someone attempt to find a set of openings according to the
style of player they think they are; instead of looking at those
openings that they seem to run into more often than not?
Kelly
The problem is there are soooooo many openings. How do you find the right one for you? You don't. You just get as close as you can and then stick with that opening everytime you play. You'll become familiar with traps, patterns and middle game plans. It really does make a difference.
02 Aug 05
Originally posted by wibWhat is the common thoughts on various playing styles, there are
Yes. You should find openings that suit your style and then learn to transpose offbeat openings of other players into lines that you're familiar with.
The problem is there are soooooo many openings. How do you find the right one for you? You don't. You just get as close as you can and then stick with that opening everytime you play. You'll become familiar with traps, patterns and middle game plans. It really does make a difference.
agressive players, positional ones, any others?
Kelly
02 Aug 05
Originally posted by KellyJayI think most styles are just variations of the above with people falling in-between those two somewehere.
What is the common thoughts on various playing styles, there are
agressive players, positional ones, any others?
Kelly
A lot of it depends on a person's amount of chess skills. Someone that feels very comfortable in endgames would enjoy trading pieces early, opening the board and using their king, rook, and pawn skills to try to get the win. Some players prefer crowded middle games where they feel their tactical skills will give them an opportunity to win material or have a shot at checkmate. The more pieces there are on the board the more chances they have to attack. They're the kind of player that never trades queens unless it's absolutely forced.
I really don't think any player (at our levels) has a definite style though. All styles seem to be a combination of patience, chess skill, fear, and confidence.
I don't think that really answered your question, but that's about the best I can do. 🙂
03 Aug 05
Originally posted by wibThe strongest player I ever knew personally had a rating that was
I think most styles are just variations of the above with people falling in-between those two somewehere.
A lot of it depends on a person's amount of chess skills. Someone that feels very comfortable in endgames would enjoy trading pieces early, opening the board and using their king, rook, and pawn skills to try to get the win. Some players prefer crowde ...[text shortened]...
I don't think that really answered your question, but that's about the best I can do. 🙂
floating around 2400 USCF. He simply was solid, he didn't attack,
attack, attack, it was more like wrestling with a huge snake, he just
squeezed the life out of you. If you blundered he was always quick
to take advantage.
Kelly
03 Aug 05
Originally posted by KellyJayThat's a style. Marozy perfected it.
The strongest player I ever knew personally had a rating that was
floating around 2400 USCF. He simply was solid, he didn't attack,
attack, attack, it was more like wrestling with a huge snake, he just
squeezed the life out of you. If you blundered he was always quick
to take advantage.
Kelly
03 Aug 05
Originally posted by KellyJayEach month, play a new opening reperatoire, whatever one gives you the most success, is probably the opening best suited for you. For example, I used to play off-beat stuff, double edged kinda openings, against 1.e4 I would play the Taimanov Sicilian, against 1.d4 I'd play Benomi like openings or try to transpose it to some favourable Caro-Kann Botvinnik-Attack. As white I would play this crazy 1.d4 then an early g4 set-up, but as of late, I found out I play better OTB, with classical openings, without much adventure. Against 1.e4, I've had success with the simple e5, and playing a Petrov or Four Knights. How do I manage to win those games, I honestly don't know, but the stats say I win with this "drawish" stuff. Against d4, I've had luck with simple Slavs, again, so boring, yet, my stats on FICS say I should play it. As white, I used to play d4, now I'm playing e4.
I have never been one to study openings, middle games, or for that
matter end games. I have cracked a book or two, but never devoted
myself to really grabbing what was in them.
Should someone attempt to find a set of openings according to the
style of player they think they are; instead of looking at those
openings that they seem to run into more often than not?
Kelly
03 Aug 05
Originally posted by DeadBeSwallowedGood point, I may enjoy some openings yet get my butt kicked in
Each month, play a new opening reperatoire, whatever one gives you the most success, is probably the opening best suited for you. For example, I used to play off-beat stuff, double edged kinda openings, against 1.e4 I would play the Taimanov Sicilian, against 1.d4 I'd play Benomi like openings or try to transpose it to some favourable Caro-Kann Botv ...[text shortened]... g, yet, my stats on FICS say I should play it. As white, I used to play d4, now I'm playing e4.
them more than I'd like to. Then again I could be winning in other
openings I don't find so enjoyable, but they may suit my style or
strenghts in chess better I may win with more often. Shame this site
does not track the top ten openings we play here with our stats in
each, so we can at a glance see this.
Kelly
03 Aug 05
I find that with openings I classify along two lines:
1). Open or Closed
Are there open lines for my pieces or do I have to slowly manouver around first? I like open positions better because they tend to be more straight forward and tactical. As such I try to play openings that lead that way.
2). King Safety
Most openings have different lines that lead to crazy wide open attacks and others that lead to attacks but in a more subdude manner. I find I do better with the later. I feel more comfortable when my king is safely tucked away instead of having a lot of air around it.
Find what you like and then find some openings that lead to it. Just realize that it's a long process and not as simple as saying I'm going to play the XX opening because it leads to positions I like. Because the reality of chess is that all openings lead to both positions you like and positions you don't like. The secret is being able to move your games into the positions you do like. I'm still working on that part of the game and plan to for the rest of my life 🙂
-j