Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Games & Gameplay >

Chess

Professor Silly

21:07 / 08.06.06

I started playing a lot more chess again lately, and have started a more serious study of the game. I've been running through the tutorials that came with my X-Box Chessmaster disk, and am now looking to study the openings more carefully.

In that regard I've been giving the English Opening (1. c4) quite a look, as well as the Modern Defense (1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7), Grunfeld (1. d4 Nf5 2. c4 e6), and the Nimzo-Indian.

Any other students of Chess here? What advice for studying openings might anyone have? Is this just another example of my obsession with antiquated systems?

14:22 / 09.06.06

If you really really want to be a serious student of chess, completely forget about the openings. Focus on the end-game to start with and then work your way back to the middle game, then back to the openings.

If you start losing in the middle games, focus on them, but early on learning endgames will benefit you in more ways than openings:
1.) 2 people of similar skill level, 1 studies openings, 1 studies endgames. My money is on the endgame guy every single time. If you can survive the opening without major losses or falling into a trap and can then force the game into a smaller piece count you'll win.
2.) Learning endgames gives you a much better idea of how to use the pieces and gradually you add more and more pieces to the endgame "mix" until you are learning middle game strategy. You will also notice that you will start to have a vision of gearing the game towards advantageous trades to create the endgame positions you've been studying.

When I decided to start seriously studying chess, I studied openings and could often come into a really good middle game, but couldn't always figure out how to take advantage of an extra pawn or a good position, but after really studying endgames I found that I could slowly make favorable trades into the endgame and then beat my opponents much much more often. Pandolfini's Endgame Course is a good book to pick up if you choose this path.

In response to your openings question, your choices are very solid. I'd stay away from the Sicilian because everybody else knows it. In studying the openings you chose, I'd not necessarily always stick to the book moves, but more learning about the general strategy behind your moves since if you're playing in a tournament, some 1300 guy may not know all the book moves to the English. The book moves are generally the best moves for a reason and if you know the idea behind your opening, you can punish them for bad moves due to their lack of knowledge.

I recommend (if you're aggressive) learning Bird's Opening and/or the Dutch Defense.

Professor Silly

14:53 / 09.06.06

awesome

My endgame is actually my strongest at the moment--online I often end up a few pieces behind but am able to pull it off in the end (well, half the time, anyway). I know I still have work to do with the endgame, in that I still can't see how to force a game to a draw when too many pawns are present. I still tend to move too fast without thinking thing through in the midgame as well.

Dutch was actually on my list, if only because the English can transistion into Dutch so easily (in addition to changing into Queen's Gambit Declined or King's Indian).

Thank you very much for your suggestions--I swear I won't ignore the endgame!

23:51 / 16.12.07

a post full of good ideas by chaated. thanks for that.

you made a recommendation on an endgame course (which i googled and it was trashed as just-for-beginners), but would you (if you still post here) make a recommendation for learning about opening strategies, as you mentioned: learning about the general strategy behind your moves.

thats exactly what im looking for right now. i dont so much care if i can name a sicilian or a lopez (which my white opponent just played on me) except to google them. i actually approach chess as a role-playing game.

i just started my book-learnin (last night) so maybe i can just pick up any random book on openings and it will explain strategy reasonably well (rather than listing a sequence of moves and expecting me to pick up on subtleties). wikipedia is not a good chess source, although its prolific.

00:43 / 17.12.07

I will second that. I got to the point where I could (virtually) always beat a beginner, but am (almost) always beaten by a decent player. I never managed to make the leap. I want that advice.

23:26 / 07.01.08

in the past ive mostly played face-to-face games. since that last post, ive been playing slow 'mail' games (online and in my living room with my roommate). the different perspective has been illuminating. to anyone wishing to make a leap of understanding, i would recommend changing the structure of your play.

07:40 / 08.01.08

learning about the general strategy behind your moves.

Keeping an eye on the king is the best strategy. Never forget the whole point of the game is to hunt him down, all your efforts should be ultimately geared toward that.
Tactically, control the centre of the board, develop your pieces & try to tangle up your opponents, try and develop a protected attack and drive the king into a corner or toward the edge.
Good advice on endgames, except if you're playing someone competent. I'm a pretty good player, but I have only beaten my dad once or twice (I'm 32) and he relies on developing a cold war style impasse until he gets an advantage, then exchanging until he's got more pieces free to force the win.
As Bobby Fischer said, when you're material up, "Man 'em down".

jentacular dreams

16:27 / 03.03.08

End game is what makes a good chess player. However, I find it impossible to close the game, making some fundamental errors when in command. The other thing most important is the value of your pieces which we beginners do not realise

Good Intentions

13:19 / 13.04.08

Learn strategic sensibilities.

Some strategic knowledge, as opposed to tactical skill, is a prerequisite for making any sense of the openings you study in any case.

What I mean with strategic sensibility is an explicit understanding of what the types of positions are from which you can beat your opponent.

At the first level, you want to know what type of position which type of pieces want: bishops like long diagonals, rooks like open and half-open files and knights like the centre. Kings and Queens both like being out of danger, with the crucial difference that the Queen really likes having a position where she leer at the opponent or leap out into the action at a moment's notice. Any piece loves being on an outpost. Putting pieces in positions they like makers them happy, and a piece with a spring in its step can win you a game all on its own. Also, knowing what makes a well-placed piece allows you to see what your opponent would like to do with his, and hopefully stop him. To attain this first level, it'll do just being told or shown where pieces would like to go. For instance: bishops like open centres, knights like closed areas, so if the centre pawns are gone or going, it's worth swapping your knights for your opponent's bishops. Studying endgames, the excellent advice given above, can also help you heaps. Knowing where pieces would like to be is the keystone of strategic understanding.

The second level, by my count, is to understand a concept like activity. You could try to measure it quantitavely by counting how many empty and enemy squares your pieces threaten and control - that'll give you a pretty good idea. If you threaten more squares, there are less safe spaces for you opponent to develope into, and more gaps your pieces might zip in to. Sometimes its worth sacrificing a pawn or two to establish your bishop pair in an open centre, from where they can spit fire all across the board. Trying to understand when that is the case is a productive way to spend a few month's worth of study.