Re: Chess - Bookup 2000 Pro - Build 31 Setup Free
Kirby Apodaca
And by studying, I mean memorizing brute lines along with the general ideas. My opinion is that anybody below 2000 should just know the general ideas. When they reach 2000, they should memorize the basic well known lines and responses. Once they hit 2200 or so, they should start immersing themselves in some of the different variations. And then after 2300, they should learn most of the played variations. What do you think? Kasparov said "At the beginning level, openings really don't matter." (And to Kasparov, anyone under 2400 is a beginner). Do you agree?
Yeah, I agree. And then once they reach 2450, they should memorize all the variations. Right? I do think people below 2000 tend to exaggerate on the importance of openings too much. They study it too religiously, as if it's their salvation to a higher rating. I don't think memorizing lines and lines will help at all, because chances are your opponent will go out of the book lines and you'll be rendered helpless. But when you reach 2000 and beyond, your opponents are more aware of the variations, which means you'll have to be prepared too.
And by studying, I mean memorizing brute lines along with the general ideas. My opinion is that anybody below 2000 should just know the general ideas. When they reach 2000, they should memorize the basic well known lines and responses. Once they hit 2200 or so, they should start immersing themselves in some of the different variations. And then after 2300, they should learn most of the played variations. ...
By 2000, a player will know pet openings pretty well. By 2200, they will know some of these openings, with variations, fairly deep, or be good enough to play into many of the book lines without prior knowledge. If there is a bust to a particular line deep into the variation, they may be unaware and suceptible.
Once you understand the components of chess thoroughly, that is the time to start memorizing lines because that is when every little subtlety will be clear to you. You can see why a pawn move is made or why a piece is placed on a particular square instead of another when you understand the chessic elements thoroughly and can realize how they fit in with the themes and ideas of the opening in question.
This idea is shared by most people, but the number 2000 might be debatable. Imho, I don't think it's possible to reach 2000 without a decent opening repertoire. (By 2000 I mean a true OTB 2000, not chess.com "2000," lol)
No, I think the number is more around 1600, though it depends on how complicated the opening is. In my last tournament (as a 1650 OTB) the two games I lost was because I didn't know the theory! In the king's indian Samisch (not even a sharp king's indian line) I got into a clearly inferior position and my opponent (about 1700) made me suffer from it. I lost to a 2250 in the semi slav defense as well all because of not knowing the lines. Nobody likes to memorize without understanding each move (meaning they may know the "general plans" but still not know why a specific book move is played as the reasons are often very deep.) but sometimes it is necessary in order to get results. So I don't think openings should be mostly ignored until 2000 level!
A good friend of mine is +- 2150 FIDE and got there without book knowledge (he owns zero opening books and has no chess software). I've seen him as black play 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 Bf5 4.h4, then he thinks for half an hour, comes up with 4...Na6!? and goes on to draw his IM opponent. He knows where his pieces should go, is tactically good and his endgames are superb. I think he needs to start improving his openings now to go any further.
I've started to favor 3. Nc3 in the French and 2. Nf3/3. d4 against the sicilian again, but there's so much theory in some lines and I don't want to devote all my chess time to opening theory when there are other aspects that need improving as well. I know the main ideas in these lines (Wineawer gives black structural advantages and white attacking chances, Yugoslav is a opposite side race-to-mate, etc) and about 8-13 moves of theory in them, but no more. In these sharp lines, should I be concenred into "walking into my opponent's preparations" in an OTB tournament at a 1600-2000 level? Or is that not a concern until like 2400+. I like those lines, but not if it means playing someone who knows 27 moves of book lines in sharp variations!
" Preparation " for me now is very different than it was in the USA . Its almost impossible to find the games of many US players in databases unless they play a lot of fide rated chess and not many do. In Europe thats not the case and I can check what even sub 2000 players play , if I so desire, and have a nasty surprise waiting for them in their favorite opening/defense. In general though I dont prepare for specific opponents if they are under 2000 .
Hello. My rating is currently hovering around 2000 (as my username says, lol). Anway, I have had serious trouble memorizing theory. So, I decided to pick openings that 1) fit my style and 2) don't require me to know a huge amount of theory (for black I chose the French and Nimzo-Indian). I have also focused more on the ideas of the openings rather than just memorizing moves. However, I still have trouble. My chess coaches (2 IM's and a GM) have also told me that my greatest weakness is not knowing enough theory. I have also lost several games against 2000 and 2100's partly because I got a slightly worse position out of the opening. So, how do all of you learn theory? What do you think is the best way to learn theory, and actually remember it?
Well, having absolutely no clue or interest in becoming a good chessplayer through theory or any other means myself, I will say that it is hard to memorize anything if you don't know why it's that way. It's no easier to memorize several branches of chess moves any more than so many sets of random numbers, so you need to give reason to the randomness. Study why those lines go the way they do, why you don't play something else, and what opportunities you will have or should try to create.
I have been using Chess Opening Wizard Express as my engine, my trainer, and opening explorer. I would recommend this to people from 1400-2000. It names major positions in openings and shows critical positions. This is very useful when going through analysis's and games.The owner is Mike Leahy and the site is bookup.com. Try this ebook out and give me a feedback.
Thanks for your recommendation, but i didn't like it so much. I usually use the German engine Fritz 12, which has an incredible large data base with openings. It basicly doesn't matter what you want to play and how well you know it, Fritz always knows it better. Its maximum performance is at approximately 2700, and you can adjust it to any level below and even tell it how to play (move a lot of pawn, be aggressive or passive, positional or tactical gamestyle). One thing i disliked about the Chess Opening Wizard is that shows a lot of very obvious stuff, and i didn't find a way to skip it fast until it shows relevant stuff. Maybe that's because i am not in the range of your recommendation (1400-2000). My current ELO is 2153
Bookup,
a chess opening database by Mike Leahy which keeps games, that is their moves along with optional annotations inside a tree structure. Since nodes in this tree are indexed by a kind of Zobrist key of a position, Bookup is able to immediately recognize transpositions, and is suited to learn and train openings and to investigate, analyze and expand opening books. Bookup was developed since the 80s, initially under MS-DOS, and was further developed and ported to Macintosh and x86 PCs running Mac OS and Windows with a modern GUI called Chess Opening Wizard (COW) [1]. While early Bookup was bundled with Zarkov as analysis engine, COW includes Stockfish, Crafty and Ruffian, and further supports any Chess Engine Communication Protocol (WinBoard) and UCI compatible engine [2] for analysis and looking for contradictions between game statistics and current chess theory, dubbed backsolving [3].
It's hard to rate some of these books though since I've read them at different points of my chess "career" from complete beginner to 2400+ lichess and pushing 2000 USCF. I can't necessarily recommend my favorite books to everyone, because it depends on what your personal chess level is.
Ok, I admit it. I am a chess addict. I have played thousands of games over 40 years (actually 27,951, but who's counting). Why, I played over 4,000 games on the Internet last year alone. I have over 2,000 chess books. I can't possibly read them all. I have millions of games on DVD, CD, thumb drives, Zip drives, 3.5 inch diskettes, and 5 1/4 inch diskettes (they are still good). I can't possibly play them all. I have all the chess programs and all the databases. I have ChessBase and NICBase and Chess Assistant and Bookup and Fritz and GNU and TascBase and HIARCS and Rybka and Shredder. I am playing so much on the Internet or at clubs, I don't have the time to look at them. My games are in PGN, CBF, CBH, CBV, TXT, ZIP, DOC, PDF, RTF, etc. And I have written dozens of chess books and hundreds of chess articles. And I haven't run out of ideas yet. I have organized dozens of events, been involved in chess politics at all levels, and have won my fair share of tournaments. I have my own chess web site with hundreds of links and dozens of chess trivia articles. I guess I am a hopeless chess addict. I read chess blogs instead of news and This Week in Chess instead of keeping upwith current events this week. My wife tries to break me of it with cards or sports or TV or movies or sex or seeing relatives, but nothing works to cure me. I have withdrawal pains if I don't play a game after a few days. I am on the computer playing chess or at the local chess club or looking at some postal game all the time. Don't let this happen to you. Identify the signs early. You know you are a chess addict if:
- you bump into someone or something and say "J'adoube." And you don't even know French.