How much opening knowledge does a novice need?
While playing against the computer, I often mess up badly in the opening. Most articles about learning to play chess say that beginners should not spend too much time on openings, but rather study tactics and endgames. I agree with the general idea of this and think it really does not matter to know the fine points of one opening line or another at the level I play. However, running into serious trouble during the opening phase isn't fun either.
Up to know, I tried to follow some advice I read somewhere: after the game, I would look up the opening and see what went wrong (I just bought a copy of MCO-14
for this, which will certainly cover more ground than Reuben Fine's "Ideas Behind the Chess Openings
" that I grabbed from a local library a few weeks ago. However, for a beginner like me the more wordy style of Fine's book comes in handy). This certainly gave me some experience, but even if I wouldn't have such a terrible memory there are simply too many opening moves around! Therefore, I continue to get into messed up games regularly.
One reason why I am (still) hesitating to study openings is that if I look up an opening line I always see comments like "gives white an advantage". In most cases, however, I don't understand what the fuss is about because I simply do not have the knowledge/experience to see this "advantage". Nevertheless, I feel that I need to improve my opening play. Therefore, I decided to simply pick one opening move and stick with it for the foreseeable future. Starting out with the same move will hopefully cut down on the number of traps I can fall for and if I continue to look into MCO-14 after each game I will hopefully learn something. The only problem is, which opening should I choose? Every opinion I saw on which one is good for beginners seemed to attract others stating the opposite. Therefore, I will go with the best advice I found so far: at the beginner level, all openings are sound. The biggest obstacle for me will to not waste time browsing through websites and books any more but simply to stick with one of them!
Up to know, I tried to follow some advice I read somewhere: after the game, I would look up the opening and see what went wrong (I just bought a copy of MCO-14
for this, which will certainly cover more ground than Reuben Fine's "Ideas Behind the Chess Openings" that I grabbed from a local library a few weeks ago. However, for a beginner like me the more wordy style of Fine's book comes in handy). This certainly gave me some experience, but even if I wouldn't have such a terrible memory there are simply too many opening moves around! Therefore, I continue to get into messed up games regularly.One reason why I am (still) hesitating to study openings is that if I look up an opening line I always see comments like "gives white an advantage". In most cases, however, I don't understand what the fuss is about because I simply do not have the knowledge/experience to see this "advantage". Nevertheless, I feel that I need to improve my opening play. Therefore, I decided to simply pick one opening move and stick with it for the foreseeable future. Starting out with the same move will hopefully cut down on the number of traps I can fall for and if I continue to look into MCO-14
after each game I will hopefully learn something. The only problem is, which opening should I choose? Every opinion I saw on which one is good for beginners seemed to attract others stating the opposite. Therefore, I will go with the best advice I found so far: at the beginner level, all openings are sound. The biggest obstacle for me will to not waste time browsing through websites and books any more but simply to stick with one of them!
posted by sciurus at 3:01 PM
5 Comments:
So which one (or should i say "ones") is it going to be? If you are still looking for an opening repertoire (as it is also refered to and since i think you're looking for openings for both black & white) try to find openings that suit your style of play. Look for openings that bring about middlegame positions that you feel comfortable with. This is advice i acquired and like to pass on to you :-)
Thanks for the advice! As for the question which particular opening - well, I am not really sure yet. For now the plan is very simple, because I play mostly correspondence chess, where you are allowed to look into books. Therefore, my current plan (calling it a repertoire would be a wild exagerration) is as simple as playing 1.d4 as white and answering 1.e4 with the Caro-Kann. The biggest problem I see is that there are simply too many variations, although of course it would be very boring otherwise. So I guess unless I obtain some kind of superpower to make my opponents to stay with "my" opening, I will have to learn to deal with all responses.
I took a look at the link about the Colle system. Looks interesting. Right now, I have a couple of correspondence games going on, where I played the Queen's gambit. After I got MCO-14, I read that I played a "dangerous variation" whatever that means: 1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.e4. May be I should look at the Silman book druss recommended. The biggest problem there is the time... How much time do you spend on chess?
I think it is best to set yourself a limit of what you are getting yourself into. If you are getting yourself into may different things at once, which is tempting in chess, you will be running into the issue of time. I have set myself the regime of spending atleast 2 serious hours per day at improving my game, for 5 days a week. For now those 2 hours are spend on tactics (mainly) and something on the side. In time i will swith to study something else. But i will try and stick with the 2 serious hours. Hope it helps you making a decision ;-)
I agree. There is this article at chessville saying basically the same: one thing after another. At the moment I am probably putting in 1h daily with study/play one half each.
Yeah! I'm a big fan of that article myself :-)
Post a Comment
<< Home