How do you choose an opening that is right for you?

B. G. wrote (21 Jul 2003 10:32:33 -0700):

That's tough to answer. There's a book written on the subject,
called "How to build your opening chess repertoire" by Steve
Giddins. IM Silman recommends this book in his review:
http://www.jeremysilman.com/book_rev...ild_chess.html

Not having read the book, I can't say whether it's good or not.

_
Also, perhaps look at:

http://www.jeremysilman.com/book_rev...s_opening.html

In rec.games.chess.analysis Ivan wrote:
How do you choose an opening that is right for you?

When you shall need to choose opening you won't need to ask
this question. It's a catch.

--
Roman M. Parparov - NASA EOSDIS project node at TAU technical manager.
Email: http://www.nasa.proj.ac.il
Phone/Fax: +972-(0)3-6405205 (work), +972-(0)64-669-189 (home)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The economy depends about as much on economists as the weather does on
weather forecasters.
-- Jean-Paul Kauffmann

I've actually resolved now not to 'study' openings, endgames or middlegame
as if they were separate entities. I study instructive game collections
(Road To Chess Mastery, Nunn's Understanding Chess etc.) which look at the
game as a whole. From these you will learn naturally which openings lead to
middlegames you like the look and feel of, and you will learn the basic
ideas of these openings. Then just play them, thinking about each move as if
you were already into the middlegame - just play chess. Then afterwards you
can look up the textbooks to check your play (in opening, endgame etc.). It
may seem a longer process, but I firmly believe it leads to better
understanding than trying to memorize lines, particularly if you study the
games 'solitaire' fashion - trying to work out the next move - and it's a
lot more fun.


"Ivan" wrote in message
om...
How do you choose an opening that is right for you?

All of the advice is good. But as one poster mentioned, unless you're at
least 1300, studying openings is a waste of time. Time would be better
spent studying tactics. When I go to 1300 I learned the main lines of the
Ruy Lopez for white (way to much stuff to learn...should have picked a
better opening), and the French and King's Indian Defense for black. I
chose these openings in a peculiar way.

As mentioned in an earlier post, you should just play through your games.
Without knowing any opening. And like any good student, you should be
writing down all of your games. After you get a dozen or so under your
belt, look up your openings moves in a book. You'll probably find you're at
least 4 or 5 moves into a well known opening already. From there, just see
what move you made on the 6th move that was, "out of book" and then try to
make the right move next game. And keep doing this. In a few months you'll
be surprised on how well you know an opening.

But also, some good advice I have heard (I think from Dan Heisman) was to
try to play sharp tactical openings when you're starting out. The King's
Indian Defense is good because it typically leads to very common pawn
formations. So it's lessons are two-fold. First you get to know a reliable
(and currently in fashion) defense for black, and second you get the benefit
of playing some typical pawn formations.

In the end, the opening that suits you best will most likely find you, not
the other way around. Some openings just feel "right" and "natural" as if
the moves are obvious to you.

GAM

"Ivan" wrote in message
om...
How do you choose an opening that is right for you?

In rec.games.chess.analysis Loki wrote:
All of the advice is good. But as one poster mentioned, unless you're at
least 1300, studying openings is a waste of time. Time would be better
spent studying tactics. When I go to 1300 I learned the main lines of the
Ruy Lopez for white (way to much stuff to learn...should have picked a
better opening), and the French and King's Indian Defense for black. I
chose these openings in a peculiar way.


It's much closer to 2300 than to 1300 for the threshold of studying
openings.

--
Roman M. Parparov - NASA EOSDIS project node at TAU technical manager.
Email: http://www.nasa.proj.ac.il
Phone/Fax: +972-(0)3-6405205 (work), +972-(0)64-669-189 (home)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The economy depends about as much on economists as the weather does on
weather forecasters.
-- Jean-Paul Kauffmann

Roman M. Parparov wrote:
In rec.games.chess.analysis Loki wrote:

All of the advice is good. But as one poster mentioned, unless you're at
least 1300, studying openings is a waste of time. Time would be better
spent studying tactics. When I go to 1300 I learned the main lines of the
Ruy Lopez for white (way to much stuff to learn...should have picked a
better opening), and the French and King's Indian Defense for black. I
chose these openings in a peculiar way.



It's much closer to 2300 than to 1300 for the threshold of studying
openings.

I wonder if you're talking about two different things. Even a beginning
player needs some idea of how to start a game. Before I ever played a
tournament game, I somehow got the idea that as White it's a good idea
to play 1.e4 and then play d4 as soon as possible. Then, I learned the
first few moves of some named openings and was ready to play.

It is probably reasonable to try to follow 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 with a
plan to play the Scotch, or the Ruy Lopez, or whatever. Learning a few
motifs and focussing on repeating good experiences is picking an opening
repertoire and a small amount of study is probably repaid.

Deep study of an opening is impossible at this level.

But I suspect you both know you are talking about different things.

John

I found that as a 1700-1900 rated player I felt reasonably comfortable
playing against d4 c4 Nf3 but not e4. A good friend of mine (who is rated
2200) who has in the past given me lessons taught me the Sicilian but it
seemed too easy for a player at or above my level to start the king side
pawn storm and kill me. Then I discovered an opening which allows black to
get a fairly solid position in my experience quite easily. This may be due
to the fact that it isn't currently in fashion and most players will not
know more than 2 or 3 moves of book theory.

Try the Scandinavian (Centre-Counter) 1. e4 d5 2. ed Qxd5 3. Nc3 Qa5 If it
was good enough for Anand to play against Kasparov (he got beat but not out
of the opening)

How do you choose an opening that is right for you?

Find a former or current world champion whose style of play you like, and copy
his.

All openings are good. The trick is to find one that you are comfortable
with.
I am not comfortable playing against e4 so the French Defence suits me.
What suits you? You must search by eliminating the openings
that are akward for you personality.
Play an opening for a season and decide if it is for you.
"chessica" wrote in message
...
dont be in a hurry to spend lots off time on a opening, you will deviate