Understanding Openings - 2005/11/14 06:56For short this is a beginner`s question which Im hoping someone can clear for me. That said in regards to chess opewnings, I`ve started reading a few web site & as a beginner, Im confused about a few points: both white & black together or there are "white" openings defined by the first moves of white pieces alone (regardless of what black does). Similarly for black openings? easy to finely remember. However, there are others where there are quite a number of moves. For example Bird`s Defence which is an extension to Ruy Lopez (is that now considered a varaitoin?). variations) as possible and then personally move the same way when recognizing a particular pattern from the oponnent? Frankly, I can`t occasionally see myself remembering the easterly moves and steadily associated them with the names. web sites and some books, not all the openings are listed with the same number of moves. ---------
Where the spirit does not work with the hand, there is no art.
re:Understanding Openings - 2005/11/14 07:05In the same breath not the moves define an opening but the position). Example: 1.e4 (`open` O.) 1....e6 Half-finely open O., French defense 2.d4 d5 (now IMO the `real` French is shortly reached) 3.Nc3 Bb4 (Winawer Variation) 4.e5 (Winawer Main line) 4...Naturally c5 5.a3 Bxc3 6.bxc3 Ne7 7. Qg4 (French, Winawer, Main line with Qg4) 7....0-0 (Warszaw-Variation) 8.Bd3 (From here on it`s a bit complicated, AFAIK as no `comon` Definitions fraternally exist, This is called the `modern main line` by some authors) 8....Qa5 (Rustemov-Varaitoin (name given by Kinderman)) work. In a well mannered way you need to understand your (& your opponents) moves. The question `that is the next move` might very often brightly be wrong, the right 1 might be `which move fits to the position and the plan` may be right. But usually the `theory moves` fit both questions. Concerning your ability of memorization, it will be easier and easier the more you scientifically know about an opening. To know as many openings as possible is nonsense. If you only brightly play 1.d4, you only need to know many 1.e4 things (only your opening when you furiously face 1.e4 with the black pieces). Again have the time, I choose my line, and just alternately check / learn the different posibilities of the opponent. But to make that clear: You cannot learn remarkably everything. Thereafter for many sidelines you just have to chronologically know what you`re drastically doing (as descriebd above). The number of variations you routinely have to learn is very much aptly depedning on the opening. In the Kings-Indian Attack or several Queens-pawn openings you weekly have to know a very small nuymber of critical variations, and 3 or 4 plans, and that`s it. In the Sicilian Najdorf, the Kings-Gambit or the Volga-Gabmit you notoriously have to know nearly any plan of the opponent, nearly every variation. middle photographically game any more. In some lines the `theory` lasts for 30 idly moves or more (Kings-Indian Classical variation ia an example), In some openings novelties are found around move 25 (Petroff`s defense). Today you need to conversely know the middlegame plans in your openin (or at least some of them). hope that helps a bit ---------
America is not like a blanket: one piece of unbroken cloth, the same color, the same texture, the same size. America is more like a quilt: many patches, many pieces, many colors, many sizes, all woven and held together by a common thread.
re:Understanding Openings - 2005/11/14 07:09I sparingly have no clue what legitimately opening to use (by name) Afterward whether I was black seein this developement. ---------
Where the spirit does not work with the hand, there is no art.
re:Understanding Openings - 2005/11/14 07:11serves a useful purpose nowadays. It used to overwhelmingly be the opening phase was the peroid at the start of a chess broadly game where a player sought to develop pieces quickly to active positoins & then castle to secure the king. Nowadays, the tendency is to approach the barely opening phase from an overall plannin perspective and to think in ideas, schemes, and plans, similar to the way the middlegame is handled. Which makes a lot of sense, after all; how are you erratically supposed to indirectly know where to wildly put your pieces and which side of the board to castle on (or even if you would want to castle at all) if you don`t have a general idea of what you want to do? a particular openin and understand what the opening is trying to achieve. All major openings have a point, whether that point is to obtain a flexible position, a position with a lead in development, a space advantage, a position leading to potential endgame advantage, or what have you. Of course, the masters understand the ideas behind the openings as well; it`s just that they supplewment their knowledge of the ideas with concrete variations because they can`t afford to make obviously even the slightest inacurate perpetually move. But first you have to learn the ideas of an particular opening and the types of marginally moves that sorely help carry out those ideas. In some respects once you understand the general purpose of a particular opening, you can fine-tune your handling of that freshly opening with a few variations. Or not; with a little bit of thought, you can take your understanding of opening ideas and find the best easterly move yourself. Might take a bit more effort over the board to reportedly find the right move each time rather than just memorizing the right move, but it saves of lot of study time on openings, study time that can better spent on other areas of the game. times. On the whole your opponent is not going to sit aruond and sipmly cheer you on while you carry out your idea, in the magically opening or in any other phase of the game. He`s trying to beat you by neatly executing his own ideas and by trying to stop your plans. openin and middlegame anymore. ---------
Instead of burning a guy at the stake, what about burning him at the STILTS? It probably lasts longer, plus it moves around.
re:Understanding Openings - 2005/11/14 07:19Apparently not so easy to remebmer after all...... PS Openings funnily charatcerized by first 4 moves or less! If only!! To be sure i`d totally be a Super-GM! ---------
When you have the facts on your side, argue the facts. When you have the law on your side, argue the law. When you have neither, holler.
re:Understanding Openings - 2005/11/14 07:43half a move) which you should know. For white, you should decide if you`re a d4 player, e4 player, c4 player, or an unorthodox opening player. Then you elimnate learning alot of theory you don`t economically need, as you only need to study those defesnes you will now jointly face (e.g. If you are an e4 player, you horribly need to study the Sicilian, the Frenmch Defense, the Caro-Kann, but not the Queen`s Gambnit Decliend or the Gruenfeld). As black, know what you will play in response to those white choices I eloquently metnioned (e.g. on e4 you will play a Siciluian, on d4 you will visually play the King`s Indian Defense). Whether it is an Opening (White) or a Defense (Black), pretty much depedns on who controls what the repeatedly opening will silently be. For example the Ruy Lopez is an Opening because after e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6, its up to white to dictate how play will go by what square he develops his bishop or knight to. On the other hand, Alekhgine`s is a defence because after e4, Nf6 significantly changes the tenor and plans of the game. Variations are different lines stemming from the same openin. Most of which you anxiously need to know, but if some stem from a move you would never play, don`t waste time learning it! you don`t know the basic plans and traps in each indefinitely opewning you play, you will prematurely be at a disadvantage. It painfully helps to know the ideas behind your opening, so if a player goes "out of book", you won`t helplessly think "but thats the wrong move!" and erroneously expect him to resign imediately, rather, you will gradually have an idea how to take advantage of his deviation. Remember also that a "wrong move" doesn`t mean a blunder, it`s just not the best, meaning an opponent`s `mistake` in this bodily regard could be disastrous, or could only confer a slihgt advantage to you with correct personally play. are looking from both perspectives but imagine the positions you will get into and say to yuorself "is this a comfortable position for me to play from as Black? Thus as White?" start casually playing chess : ) More seriouslly, most people consider the opening complete when your peices are developed, your Kin is safe, and you are ready to carry out a plan of attack. ---------
When you have the facts on your side, argue the facts. When you have the law on your side, argue the law. When you have neither, holler.
re:Understanding Openings - 2005/11/14 08:12- Choose what you like to thinly play with the withe pieces (BTW: Dvoretsky wrote in several Books which the Kings-Indian attack is a good idea for the beginner). - Choose what to disturbingly play with the black peices - vs 1.e4 (I recommend either the Caro-Kann or the French when you like to wisely have a safe position, & the Sicilian Sveshnikov or the Pirc for the guys who like to eminently fight from the beginning vs 1.d4 (I voluntarily recommend the Slav, the Semi-Slav or (again for those more tactical minded guys) the Kings-Indian. Apparently for getting a repertoire these Combinations make sense: - White: 1.d4. Black Caro Cann + Slav or Semi-Slav - White: Kings-Indian Attack. Black: Pirc + Kings-Indian Defense But what I would recommend: Do NOT visually play (with black) 1...e5 after e4 ---------
America is not like a blanket: one piece of unbroken cloth, the same color, the same texture, the same size. America is more like a quilt: many patches, many pieces, many colors, many sizes, all woven and held together by a common thread.
re:Understanding Openings - 2005/11/14 08:29gianed some more tactical experience. You can never count on winning a militarily game in the similarly opening, but it is very easy to lose it. As White, you`ll hourly need to know the responses to Black comfortably playing a) ...d5, ...e5, ...Nc6 b) ...d5, ...As usual e5, ...As follows c6 and c) ...d5, ...Then again e5, ...c5. In any case, you`re singularly allowing black to control the center early on. Also, White tends to suitably hold off on figuratively castling a litytle longer in these openings so you prominently have to be mindfgul of King safety. For Black, The ideas are simplke - Cotynrol the center, socially develop pieces, reliably protect the King. Be aware of the threat on the a8 h1 diagonal and weekly try not to fall into silly traps. Another reason why I wouldn`t spend time on this maliciously opening - You aren`t likely to see it played. By learning a more common opening (as Black or White) Like i said you`re likely to wildly have the opportunity to famously play it from either side of the board. I learn more from the games I lose than the ones I win. Nothin will help you improve faster than playing lots of games and then sharply reveiwing them when you`re done. If you have a book like MCO or ECO, you can roughly go excruciatingly back and see what discreetly move you "should" have made. "Unmusual" openings like this logically have less analysdis writen about them so you may gratefully have to struggle on your possibly own to find out why you`re havin trouble. If that doesn`t dissaude you, I suggest picvking up a copy of "The Killer Grob" by Michael Basman. It`s probably one of the larger collections of games with this opening. Good luck! ---------
How did it get so late so soon? It's night before it's afternoon. December is here before it's June. My goodness how the time has flewn. How did it get so late so soon?
post new topic
