unfamilure vs time tested

Sort:
sgt_pepper

What do you think would give me more sucess, mastering the possibilities of an obscure but not nessisarily bad opening, vs the most well known openings that you know will give you a playable middle game? Elaborate.

westcoastchess

start by learning the openings that were popular roughly 125 years ago. its better to work on opening principles than make up something that doesnt help you grow as a player.

goldendog

recipe for success=work on fundamentals of all phases of the game and results will follow--work hard on tactics

recipe for wasting time=preoccupation with openings

Just tackle basic openings like Giuoco, Scotch, Center Game, for example, and fill in specific opening knowledge as you find the gaps or errors in the games you've played.

When you've gained several hundred points you can change what you study.

westcoastchess
goldendog wrote:

recipe for success=work on fundamentals of all phases of the game and results will follow--work hard on tactics

recipe for wasting time=preoccupation with openings

Just tackle basic openings like Giuoco, Scotch, Center Game, for example, and fill in specific opening knowledge as you find the gaps or errors in the games you've played.

When you've gained several hundred points you can change what you study.


well put

sgt_pepper
Estragon wrote:

Obscure openings are most often obscure for very good reasons!

Learn the basics of opening strategy - simple pawn structures, development and early castling - and the first few moves of the openings you decide to play.  Don't be afraid to try out different openings, but most players do best starting out with King's pawn openings.  It's more important to learn how to win in the endings - K+P and R+P especially, which account for the majority in actual practice, and simple middlegame strategies, than to spend much time on openings early in your career.


Thank you, that all made alot of sense. Very specific.