The most comprehensive to my knowledge:
http://www.chessville.com/reviews/EncyclopediaofOpeningErrors.htm
My suggestion: get a ChessBase Megabase, and run a filter for games under, say 15 moves for an opening you want to investigate.
Best book on traps and trap counters
Sort:
Crazychessplaya wrote:
The most comprehensive to my knowledge:
http://www.chessville.com/reviews/EncyclopediaofOpeningErrors.htm
My suggestion: get a ChessBase Megabase, and run a filter for games under, say 15 moves for an opening you want to investigate.
I appreciate you taking the time to share that. I think if I learn all of the traps and counters during the common openings especially, it would improve my game by leaps and bounds.
Recommended:
1000 minature chess traps by Andras Mesraos games with a maximum of 15 moves classifed by ECO brief notes great for building your pattern library on traps
http://www.newinchess.com/1000_Miniature_Chess_Traps-p-1742.html
Greatest ever Tricks and Traps by Gary Lane
101 Chess Opening Traps by Steve Giddens
222 Opening Traps after 1.e4 by Karsten Muller
222 Opening Traps after 1.d4 by Karsten Muller
If you want to learn more than you ever want to know about traps study Frank Marshall's Games with a find tooth comb
Just buy Paul Littlewood, Chess Tactics (1984), about $15 and 150 pages.
Gives 15 chapters of "essential tactical knowledge," with both "how to do," and "how to defend against." It will add 200 points to your rating (and quickly).
And the examples can be done without even using a chess board. Simple.
Ditto with "Essential Chess Endings Explained Move by Move," Jeremy Silman, (@1990).
"Traps and Zaps" are fun, but they are too easy for your opponent to transpose away from. So most of "that study work" will not actually get used by you.
Both of the books mentioned above (and studied systematically) can make you roughly USCF B Class (1600-1880) with about a year of "hard work."
And feel free to disregard this post. First books I bought were also "Traps and Zaps." 
kborg wrote:
Just buy Paul Littlewood, Chess Tactics (1984), about $15 and 150 pages.
Gives 15 chapters of "essential tactical knowledge," with both "how to do," and "how to defend against." It will add 200 points to your rating (and quickly).
And the examples can be done without even using a chess board. Simple.
Ditto with "Essential Chess Endings Explained Move by Move," Jeremy Silman, (@1990).
"Traps and Zaps" are fun, but they are too easy for your opponent to transpose away from. So most of "that study work" will not actually get used by you.
Both of the books mentioned above (and studied systematically) can make you roughly USCF B Class (1600-1880) with about a year of "hard work."
And feel free to disregard this post. First books I bought were also "Traps and Zaps."
Thanks for the feed back. When I play match the masters on Chessmaster, it makes me choose the moves from the middle game and endgames of two GM's and I normally get ratings from high class c to class a. I tend to think most of my problems, are getting into trouble in the openings when I play other wise. I wonder if you still think this book is the answer. I find it difficult to learn the book on so many variations that I see when I play. I welcome any thoughts on how you see all of this tying together.
Below is the core advice I gave a "new guy" about 3 months ago. Feel free to disregard it. Openings are mostly a matter of style and personal preference. But's that not my main assertion below.
*******************************************************************************************
Step #1: In a nutshell, start playing Game in 15/5, 20/5, or slower if need be. Read closely, and play through these two books--
- Chess Tactics: Paul Littlewood (1984)
- Essential Chess Endgames Explained Move by Move: J. Siliman (1988)
Worked fine for me. I broke USCF 1800 five times, starting 9 months after I had a provisonal rating. Staying above that rating level, however, requires regular tournament play, and a bit of O.C.D.
I used to play an e4 repertoire based on the Scotch Gambit with the white pieces, and two repertoires with Black (QGA and the Petroff). Great tactical fun, but the theories are just "too big," and I got tired of buying extra opening books for the white side, given all the transpositions available for black.
Step #2: Consider not playing "crazy tactical openings" like double e-pawn openings. You're likely to be overwhelmed by the many combinations possible in those positions. It's very easy to drop material, and everyone is fairly "booked-up" on their favorite, sharp variation.
Consider finding yourself some "simple and universal" opening systems to play with both White and Black. And play ONLY those openings for at least a year (a Jeremy Silman recommendation) or until your rating hits about USCF 1600, "B Class".
With White you could play Larsen's Attack, or the London System (i.e. a reversed Slav), or even a reversed Schlecter Gruenfeld (i.e. Kingside fianchetto with c3 and d4). With Black you will probably need two "universal systems," one against e4, and another against d4. There are a number of "repetoire" or "universal books" for black that use d6 with Bg4, and perhaps a Kingside fianchetto.
Step #3: Many players below 1600 on Chess.com are fairly weak in the endgame. Take advantage of this fact by playing "safe moves" in your openings and middlegames. You can usually reach a "level endgame," and only then start playing for a win.
Indeed, most players on Chess.com under 1400 are "fairly clueless" on endgames. But "endgame knowledge" is the easiest part of chess to study and to remember. John Nunn, Understanding Chess Endgames (2009) (cover to cover) is all you need to be @1800 strength (USCF "A Class").
Don't be detered by endgames being slow or boring. Endgame knowledge is the easiest way to win. With endgame knowledge and opening "narrowness," as suggested above, you'll learn to play these two phases of the game rather quickly, and (as a result) have lots of extra time to think in the middlegame.
And yes, Chess players hold "very strong opinions" about the game, so don't listen to anyone who hasn't broken 1800 USCF. I still don't. There's so much blather in the forums about which sharp gambit opening to play. Keep in mind that 90 percent of active tournament players in the U.S. never break USCF 1800. If you want to make the 90th percentile (USCF 1800) you need to be systematic about how you study the 3 phases of the game: openings, middlegames, and endgames.
Indeed, I know too many USCF tournament chess players who INSIST on playing romantic, highly tactical, and gambit-type openings. And their ratings never get above 1400 to 1600 (USCF C or B Class). They play in many 5 or 6 hour-per-game chess tournaments, for full weekends, 10-20 times per year, and their wives are "chess widows."
I suggest to anyone (who will listen) that--You will "get good at chess" by playing "safely and quickly," being knowledable in the endgame, and being FAMILIAR with the (simple) openings that you use, repeatedly. You will win many more games, and sleep easier at night, because the tactics you experience in your games will be "much less wild." And you will be getting constant practice in the "thematic middlegames" that arise from the openings you are playing.
Once you reach the B Class or the A Class, you can always switch openings (or simply "add openings" to your repertoire) using whatever "systems" suit your fancy. Just be prepared to put in lots more "opening work" at that point. Especially is you play 1) e4, or the Queeen's Gambit, with the white pieces.
Once your chess knowledge (of specific openings, generic tactics, and generic endgames) increases, your playing speed will also increase. Openings and endgames can both be played fairly fast. It's the middle game that humbles us all. One slip up and the game can be effectively lost. All you will need for your middlegame study is Johann Hellsten, Mastering Chess Strategy (2010). About 300 pages of text, plus 400 compact exercises. Everything is "bite size."
And if you still insist on playing sharp tactical openings (with big opening theory, like the Ruy Lopez or the Sicilian) then you just might need a "chess coach" to help you through the blizzard of complications that you will encounter.
For another "universal system" with the white pieces, you can always use Tony Kosten, "The Dynamic English" (1999, and reprinted 4 times). Less than 200 pages, you can play this formation (the Botvinnik formation) against everything that Black throws at you.
Using "black opening systems" from the white side is the easiest way to cut your opening study time in half. The King's Indian Attack (KIA) also fits this bill. But that theory is also rather large, and you have to enjoy "flank attacks."
And if you want "everything in one book" consider Jeremy Silman, Complete Chess Strategy (@2000). It's 400 pages, about 1/3 openings, 1/3 middlegames, and 1/3 endgames. Just pick out the openings you like, study them, and study the last 2/3 of the book intensely.
Hope this helps a little.
It's easy to learn "this particular stuff" (tactics and endgame), and to play it at fairly high speed. I much prefer "studying this kind of chess" for 5 hours, than playing a 5 hour chess game. Playing at G/10 up to G/30 speed, lets you practice your openings (repeatedly) and become VERY familiar with the thematic middlegames that result. You're always on familiar ground. Your opponent usually isn't.
P.S. I have played two "universal systems" (religiously) for about a year on Chess.com. The vast majority of my games are decided by simple positional and tactical play in the endgame. And if I want to study tactics from my "live chess" or OTB games, I simply use Rybka to help sort out the mistakes for both sides.
All you really want from an opening is to "smoothly develop your pieces" and "reach a playable middlegame." All that crap about "preserving white's first move advantage" is for the GMs, and for "selling opening books." Below Expert Level, one (well established) opening is just as good as another. And arguably the "best opening" is the one you know well, and your opponent doesn't.
Last point: Include at least a 5 or 10 second bonus increment in your "live chess" games. It helps a lot with endgame practice, and teaches you to play much better under time pressure. With "bonus time" and endgame knowledge, you can usually reach the end on the game "on the board," not "on the clock."
P.S. lots of "coaches" and many well-meaning folks on Chess.com will tell you that the advice described above basically sucks, and "will cause your playing strength to stagnate" at around 1800 USCF. Whatever. Chess players are an "eccentric lot," holding very strong opinions about how to study, play, and improve at this game. Myself included. The forums overflow with blather regarding the same.
So feel free to disregard (most) everything I have said.
Best of Luck.
kborg wrote:
Below is the core advice I gave a "new guy" about 3 months ago. Feel free to disregard it. Openings are mostly a matter of style and personal preference. But's that not my main assertion below.
*******************************************************************************************
Step #1: In a nutshell, start playing Game in 15/5, 20/5, or slower if need be. Read closely, and play through these two books--
Chess Tactics: Paul Littlewood (1984) Essential Chess Endgames Explained Move by Move: J. Siliman (1988)Worked fine for me. I broke USCF 1800 five times, starting 9 months after I had a provisonal rating. Staying above that rating level, however, requires regular tournament play, and a bit of O.C.D.
I used to play an e4 repetoire based on the Scotch Gambit with the white pieces, and two repetoires with Black (QGA and the Petroff). Great tactical fun, but the theories are just "too big," and I got tired of buying extra opening books for the white side, given all the transpositions available for black.
Step #2: Consider not playing "crazy tactical openings" like double e-pawn openings. You're likely to be overwhelmed by the many combinations possible in those positions. It's very easy to drop material, and everyone is fairly "booked-up" on their favorite, sharp variation.
Consider finding yourself some "simple and universal" opening systems to play with both White and Black. And play ONLY those openings for at least a year (a Jeremy Silman recommendation) or until your rating hits about USCF 1600, "B Class".
With White you could play Larsen's Attack, or the London System (i.e. a reversed Slav), or even a reversed Schlecter Gruenfeld (i.e. Kingside fianchetto with c3 and d4). With Black you will probably need two "universal systems," one against e4, and another against d4. There are a number of "repetoire" or "universal books" for black that use d6 with Bg4, and perhaps a Kingside fianchetto.
Step #3: Many players below 1600 on Chess.com are fairly weak in the endgame. Take advantage of this fact by playing "safe moves" in your openings and middlegames. You can usually reach a "level endgame," and only then start playing for a win.
Indeed, most players on Chess.com under 1400 are "fairly clueless" on endgames. But "endgame knowledge" is the easiest part of chess to study and to remember. John Nunn, Understanding Chess Endgames (2009) (cover to cover) is all you need to be @1800 strength (USCF "A Class").
Don't be detered by endgames being slow or boring. Endgame knowledge is the easiest way to win. With endgame knowledge and opening "narrowness," as suggested above, you'll learn to play these two phases of the game rather quickly, and (as a result) have lots of extra time to think in the middlegame.
And yes, Chess players hold "very strong opinions" about the game, so don't listen to anyone who hasn't broken 1800 USCF. I still don't. There's so much blather in the forums about which sharp gambit opening to play. Keep in mind that 90 percent of active tournament players in the U.S. never break USCF 1800. If you want to make the 90th percentile (USCF 1800) you need to be systematic about how you study the 3 phases of the game: openings, middlegames, and endgames.
Indeed, I know too many USCF tournament chess players who INSIST on playing romantic, highly tactical, and gambit-type openings. And their ratings never get above 1400 to 1600 (USCF C or B Class). They play in many 5 or 6 hour-per-game chess tournaments, for full weekends, 10-20 times per year, and their wives are "chess widows."
I suggest to anyone (who will listen) that--You will "get good at chess" by playing "safely and quickly," being knowledable in the endgame, and being FAMILIAR with the (simple) openings that you use, repeatedly. You will win many more games, and sleep easier at night, because the tactics you experience in your games will be "much less wild." And you will be getting constant practice in the "thematic middlegames" that arise from the openings you are playing.
Once you reach the B Class or the A Class, you can always switch openings (or simply "add openings" to your repetoire) using whatever "systems" suit your fancy. Just be prepared to put in lots more "opening work" at that point. Especially is you play 1) e4, or the Queeen's Gambit, with the white pieces.
Once your chess knowledge (of specific openings, generic tactics, and generic endgames) increases, your playing speed will also increase. Openings and endgames can both be played fairly fast. It's the middle game that humbles us all. One slip up and the game can be effectively lost. All you will need for your middlegame study is Johann Hellsten, Mastering Chess Strategy (2010). About 300 pages of text, plus 400 compact exercises. Everything is "bite size."
And if you still insist on playing sharp tactical openings (with big opening theory, like the Ruy Lopez or the Sicilian) then you just might need a "chess coach" to help you through the blizzard of complications that you will encounter.
For another "universal system" with the white pieces, you can always use Tony Kosten, "The Dynamic English" (1999, and reprinted 4 times). Less than 200 pages, you can play this formation (the Botvinnik formation) against everything that Black throws at you.
Using "black opening systems" from the white side is the easiest way to cut your opening study time in half. The King's Indian Attack (KIA) also fits this bill. But that theory is also rather large, and you have to enjoy "flank attacks."
And if you want "everything in one book" consider Jeremy Silman, Complete Chess Strategy (@2000). It's 400 pages, about 1/3 openings, 1/3 middlegames, and 1/3 endgames. Just pick out the openings you like, study them, and study the last 2/3 of the book intensely.
Hope this helps a little.
It's easy to learn "this particular stuff" (tactics and endgame), and to play it at fairly high speed. I much prefer "studying this kind of chess" for 5 hours, than playing a 5 hour chess game. Playing at G/10 up to G/30 speed, lets you practice your openings (repeatedly) and become VERY familiar with the thematic middlegames that result. You're always on familiar ground. Your opponent usually isn't.
P.S. I have played two "universal systems" (religiously) for about a year on Chess.com. The vast majority of my games are decided by simple positional and tactical play in the endgame. And if I want to study tactics from my "live chess" or OTB games, I simply use Rybka to help sort out the mistakes for both sides.
All you really want from an opening is to "smoothly develop your pieces" and "reach a playable middlegame." All that crap about "preserving white's first move advantage" is for the GMs, and for "selling opening books." Below Expert Level, one (well established) opening is just as good as another. And arguably the "best opening" is the one you know well, and your opponent doesn't.
Last point: Include at least a 5 or 10 second bonus increment in your "live chess" games. It helps a lot with endgame practice, and teaches you to play much better under time pressure. With "bonus time" and endgame knowledge, you can usually reach the end on the game "on the board," not on the clock.
P.S. lots of "coaches" and many well-meaning folks on Chess.com will tell you that the advice described above basically sucks, and "will cause your playing strength to stagnate" at around 1800 USCF. Whatever. Chess players are an "eccentric lot," holding very strong opinions about how to study, play, and improve at this game. Myself included. The forums overflow with blather regarding the same.
So feel free to disregard (most) everything I have said.
Best of Luck.
I wanted to say thank you. I know that took a lot of effort on your part. I definitely agree with the idea with white to know one opening that is simple so well that you can play with anyone.
It will be your fastest way to get better. As for being well rounded. I think one would be better off learning how to defend anything thrown at him and relying on his one opening. Technically this should get you further faster.
If lets say hypothetically you were unbeatable with white, then you should win about 45 to 48% of your games and draw the rest. If you try three openings, you probably would fall to lets say, 30% in wins, 5% in draws and lose 15% of the time with white. If you haven't worked on defense, then your winning percentage will be below 50% for sure. You can't sustain a rating that way at high levels of play.
I really am taking to heart these things. I am married and have a 3 year old boy. I don't have a lot of free time.
Do you know any cool ways to speed up your ability to defend anything, E.I. learn sudden visualization/calculation ability? Obviously with that, you could win any way, but why not simplify what it takes to win, right?
Michael de la Maza, who won $10k+ in the Expert Section of the World Open a few years back, has a book called "Rapid Chess Improvement" (for adult players). In it, he argues strongly for a rigorous and intensive study plan, based on using the tactical software CT-ART (I believe). And he altogether bypasses openings, arguing that opening study isn't needed at all, below Expert Level. It's a short book, about 150 pages.
http://www.amazon.com/Rapid-Chess-Improvement-Everyman/dp/1857442695/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1327595717&sr=1-1
IMO, you are exactly right that "winning in chess" means with getting good with the black pieces, FIRST. And I firmly believe that you can play (and learn to play) "good defense," much faster than you can generate Tal-like, mating attacks.
If you don't mind "playing defense," GM Andrew Solitis has a (short) book from a couple decades ago, "A Black Defense for the Rest of your Chess Career," (@1985).
It's a simple repetoire book for black, based on playing the Caro Kann defense and the Slav defense (both have roughly the "same" pawn structure) against everything that white might throw at you. About 180 pages in total.
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=a+black+defense+for+the+rest+of+your&rh=n%3A283155%2Ck%3Aa+black+defense+for+the+rest+of+your&ajr=0
Karpov used the Caro-Kann extensively. It's very solid, but some folks don't like it, arguing that it's "too passive." Whatever.
All I want from my openings is to blast through quickly into a level middlegame after about 20 moves, and without my pieces getting "clogged," or tripping over each other. No surprises in the opening, please.
"Good Chess Games" (i.e games without egregious mistakes) are overwhelming decided in the middlegame (via checkmate) or in the endgame (via pawn promotion).
Lots of good "repetoire books" for the black side. For example, you could play a repetoire (al la Botvinnik) based on a the Pirc and KID. But I don't know any single books on that combination, per se.
"James Rizzitano" has an excellent new book on the Queen's Gambit Accepted (for black). I used to play that system against 1)d4. Very sharp and tactical. Might suit your style. You could play QGA, and the Center Counter versus 1)e4. The theory is not too big, and both systems "kick in early," on the first move or two.
http://www.amazon.com/How-Beat-D4-Ambitious-Repertoire/dp/1904600336/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1327595578&sr=1-1
Ask around and do some searches on the internet. I'm sure you'll find lots of choices for building a good repetoire from the black side.
Essentially, you only need two "universal opening systems" (one for white and one for black). Then you can allocate your study time 45/45/10 percent--on middlgames, endgames, and openings, in that order. Makes your "chess life" much simpler. And you can always add "new systems" to your opening repetoire, later. When you have a day job, or a family, this is the easiest way to put your opponent "on familiar ground," and just get on with the game.
I prefer quick chess speed, between G/10 up to G/60. These time controls are slow enough "to think," but fast enough to have fun, and to get opening practice, and thematic middlegame practice.
If you ask around Chess.com for suggestions on "repetoire books" for the black-side, I expect you'll get dozens of good suggestions. Just separate the wheat from the chaff.
I'll look for links to the books cited above, and drop them into this post later.
Best of Luck.
Part of the idea that Michael de la Maza had been advertising, I have not only lived by somewhat, but I have seen others do themselves and succeed. Being able to calculate the right move for any position is paramount. Josh Waitzkin didn't study openings until about a year before he won his first master (about 9 years old when he started studying). That is because of his ability to calculate the right move for any position. This is the essential skill to have for playing good defense. The problem with learning one or two defenses extensively is, once people know they are all you know, they will play something that requires you to be out of your comfort zone. This is why I am trying to expand my ability to calculate. I am going to study one opening until it makes me sick. And the two best defenses against the most common openings, and then how to calculate the best move from any position. I have a feeling I can reach my goal of being the best player in the state of Ohio. He is from Cleveland, a national master candidate about 2100. Unless he has already been dethroned.
I have already beaten two characters on Chessmaster that are 1800 and 2100. I played GM Bogoljubov to positional stalemate for 45 moves and he and I were reduced to moving a few pieces behind our walls of pieces. I got careless and didn't study the board well enough. I thought were stuck in a sort of zugzwang, but with safe moves. I was grossly ahead on time. I was playing the waiting game. He saw my oversite and made me pay. The thing is, I haven't even begun to employ the strategy I just discussed yet. I think I could get really good at this game.
Yes, but a fairly large body of knowledge you "must know cold," before you can "find the right move" for any position. And it's mostly "tactical" and "endgame" knowledge.
If you haven't already studied this material before, you (probably) won't be able to figure it out over the board, unfortunately.
And much of "this knowledge" is counter-intuitive. For example, lots of Rook and Pawn endgames really must be studied, BEFORE you can play them effectively. Ditto with other elements of the game.
For example, I still have a weak understanding of "dark square-light square weakenesses," which apparently is a core theme for playing the white side of the Ruy Lopez. So I don't play the Ruy. Simple.
According to GM Kotov, there are "three fishes" of chess knowledge--1) good positional judgment, 2) and eye for combinations, and 3) the ability to calculate.
Getting stronger by studying, and playing at practice speeds of G/10 to G/30, is probably the most cost and time efficient way to improve your playing strength.
But if you start entering tournaments with time controls of 1-6 hours, be prepared to "take your lumps" during the break-in period. It takes some getting used to. And it's a big time commitment, usually the whole weekend.
Also, the top 10 percent of active USCF competitors play fully 50 percent of all the chess games in this country. When you go to an average tournment, the "50th percentile" for that particular tournament is usually around USCF 1800.
Indeed, lots of folks are truly obsessed with the game, including many 10-15 year olds, with Class B and Class A ratings that are rising, rapidly.
Not that there's anything wrong with that.
nameno1had wrote:
I have a feeling I can reach my goal of being the best player in the state of Ohio. He is from Cleveland, a national master candidate about 2100. Unless he has already been dethroned.
You'll have to try even harder.
Top Rated Players in OH
(Recently Rated Current Members are shown.)
| Rank | USCF ID | Exp. Date | Name | Current Official Published Rating | Date Published | USCF Title Earned |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 10262160 | 2099-12-31 | IM CALVIN BLOCKER | 2396 | 2012-01-01 | Life Master |
| 2 | 12480475 | 2012-03-31 | FM CARL BRANDON BOOR | 2361 | 2012-01-01 | Life Master |
| 3 | 12441362 | 2012-04-30 | WILSON SPAQI | 2329 | 2012-01-01 | Candidate Master |
| 4 | 12811395 | 2014-03-31 | MICHAEL BORIS VILENCHUK | 2318 | 2011-12-01 | Candidate Master |
| 5 | 12910828 | 2015-08-31 | KRISTOPHER C MEEKINS | 2306 | 2011-11-01 | Life Master |
Indeed. I assumed the State was loaded with players stronger than 2100.
I'll admit, I hadn't checked for a few years.
I have beaten a dozen or so Experts at USCF "Quick Tournaments," G/20 and G/30 speed. Even drawn against a Master at G/30.
But at regular time controls (USCF OTB, roughly Game in 2 hours or slower), I have one draw against an Expert, and about 30 losses (vs.opponents over 2000).
So playing "universal openings" can work pretty well a high speeds. Especially when you are basically unknown to you opponents. But at regular time controls, be ready for a "chess lesson." Ouch.
Of course, this has NOTHING to do with choosing a "narrow opening repertoire," and playing it well. It's the "middlegame and endgame," that typically decides, assuming no decisive errors beforehand.
kborg wrote:
I have beaten a dozen or so Experts at USCF "Quick Tournaments," G/20 and G/30 speed. Even drawn against a Master at G/30.
But at regular time controls (USCF OTB, roughly Game in 2 hours or slower), I have one draw against an Expert, and about 30 losses (vs.opponents over 2000).
So playing "universal openings" can work pretty well a high speeds. Especially when you are basically unknown to you opponents. But at regular time controls, be ready for a "chess lesson." Ouch.
It's the "middle or end," that typically decides the game, assuming no decisive errors beforehand.
Thanks for the advice. I honestly want to know it so well from taking my time, that if I want, to either get ahead on time in a slow game I can, or play fast in shorter games. I don't like anything shorter than 5 minutes.
Narrow opening repertoires can turn your "fast games" into very productive practice sessions. Otherwise you are just "winging it" in the opening, and every game is "an adventure." Nothing wrong with that. But you can't learn much at high speeds, except how to "play better at high speed."
Game in 5/5 is the fastest I can handle, and the kids still "chew me up." It's tough on the nerves too. Games between 15/5 and 30/5, and up to about G/60, are great for practicing and increasing your playing strength, IMO.
If you're not @USCF 1800+ playing strength, why bother with 5 to 6 hour (snoozer) games? Your time is better spent studying the "Royal Game." Much like going to the gym regularly.
Can any of you well educated students of the game help me decide which of the many chess books on traps are the most extensive? I am looking also for the book(s) to offer the best counters to these traps.
I also welcome the input of anyone else who can contribute any of their personal experience or even second hand knowledge of, any books covering the aforementioned material. Thanks for you time, thought and energy in any effort to help me.