chess openings database

Chess Openings Database

Classify and you will unmask!
Strange name, real matters
[ Sign up | Log in | Guest ] (beta)
lexherman 31 ( +1 | -1 )
Importance of opening I think the opening is more important in correspondance/internet chess than in OTB, because there is no need to avoid the most critical moves for fear of memory failure or distrust in one's analytical powers against the clock.Reading about openings therefore has a higher payoff in internet chess.
brobishkin 133 ( +1 | -1 )
The Opening... In todays world, the opening phase has gotten a bad rap... Huge data bases, a seemingly endless array of opening books, and sheer volume of variation that, must be memorized, make even the bravest chess players want to run and hide...

Beginner's books paint a picture somewhat less intimidating... They say "Get your pieces out quickly", "Use your pawns to gain space and control the center"... The platitudes go on and on... If only the realities of opening mastery were true...

Most beginners think that the opening revolves around the development of both sides armies... While true in a limited sense, this is actualy a view that misses the big picture...

The real purpose of the opening is to create a differece, or a series of differences, in respective positions and then develop your pieces around these facts so that, hopefully, these differences, will eventually play in your favor...

In view of your statement... The opening is and will always be a means to the middle game... It doesn't matter if it's internet or over the board... Sure some opening variations are more favorable that others... But the importance of the opening is calibrated at the same level (internet or OTB)...

But your statement for times sake has a ring of truth to it (in a clock like fashion)...

lexherman 58 ( +1 | -1 )
Interresting point you make about creating differences....and exploiting these during the middle does this compare to what Jeremy Silman says about finding or creating imbalanced positions?....Anyway i have a bad over the board i remember about 3-10 moves depending on the opening. Then i have to think myself....and use the heuristic rules you mentioned...but most time i take the save road.....cause in the beginning the amount of possiblities of moves are so high...there is too litlle time to analyse more risky moves....
keiserpaul 19 ( +1 | -1 )
lexherman You're right. Since years I've a lot of rarely played openings in my repertoire, and only here at GK, I am confronted with their main and "refutation" (at least according to some books) lines.
lexherman 20 ( +1 | -1 )
Keiserpaul What do you think about specialising on a few openings? So play only d2-d4...and then on king- Indian if possible?On what amount of openings would you come out??Except for the real unusual ones???
keiserpaul 106 ( +1 | -1 )
lexherman One reason I've choosen for unusual openings, is to avoid having to study too many openings. If you start 1.e2-e4 you have to know the French, the Sicilian, the Caro-Kann, the Alejchin, the Scandinavian, the Pirc, and so on. If you choose something as 1.b2-b4 or 1.g2-g4 the possibilities you have to study are much more limited. Of course, some of these openings are not so sound. But there are ones.
One good example is 1. .. Nc6, which is a good reply to almost every first white move (with the exception of 1.c4). You have to study the Nimzowitch, (you can specialize on some not well known lines as the "Colorado" 1.e4 Nc6 2. Nf3 f5 or "El Columpio" 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e5 Ng4) , and some rarities as the "Black Mustang" (1.Nf3 Nc6) and the "Lithuanian defense" (1.d4 Nc6 2.d5).
Another possibility is playing the same repertoire with White and Black. I play the Scandinavian with Black, but also with White. ( 1.h4 e5 2.d4); I play the Englund with Black, but also with White (1.h4 d5 2.e4). But what is important is that you like the middelgames that are the result of these openings. In my case I like open centers and active piece plays, and that's my major reason to prefer Scandinavian & Englund.
brunetti 116 ( +1 | -1 )
I use to play sometimes Black's opening with White, but doing so I ask myself which additional move would be good.

In the Englund case, I doubt that P-KR4 is a useful move, since in most lines the opponent plays an annoying B-KB5, and we wouldn't have anymore the P-KR3 thrust, possibly followed by P-KN4. So, if I want to play the Englund with a 1...d5 player, I prefer 1.h3, or even 1.b3, useful for a fast queenside castling.

For the same reason, if White wants to play the Scandinavian, he should think to a move that will be useful in that particular setup, and that move may be 1.g3, if one intends to play N-Q3 after PXP, while 1.h4 doesn't fit with the general plan involved in the Scandinavian.

So, it's correct to play a waiting side-move to "pass" and to play a Black defence with White, but this waiting move should be a cleverly chosen move, otherwise White cannot aspire to any concrete advantage. In the example cases given by keiserpaul, I think that White would be a little worse playing 1.h4 followed by those defences.
This IMHO.

keiserpaul 27 ( +1 | -1 )
Brunetti I do not want to discuss the soundness of these ideas, or the "cleverness" of these moves. But Gabor Kadas himself often played wild romantic games with 1.h4 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.c3. And about the Englund with white, I am searching for similar ideas ( 4.d3 or 4.f3). Please let me have the fun.
acne 4 ( +1 | -1 )
i don't memorize openings, i've poor memory =D
dozer 31 ( +1 | -1 )
Well I have studied some lines and in my opinion it is good to learn some: you can develop your pieces soundly and without risk, usually achieving a good position. But when you get to a position you have not encoutered before, even in the very beginning, you just have to start playing chess...