A beginners guide to chess improvement (from a relative beginner)

I started playing chess again just over a year ago.  I had long forgotten about it since I learned how to play from my father at age 5 or 6.  Since starting out with a rating around 500-600 i have slowly worked my way up.  Although I was able to work my way up to around 1330, some sleep deprivation, experimentation and overall suckiness has landed me around 1230 or so for now.  

While I'm not a "master" of any sort I do enjoy writing as well as reading alot on the chess.com forums.    

The following is my best shot at helping new beginners learn how to work their way up to 1000 or 1200 or so.

I've noticed that when I truly apply what I know, my rating tends to steadily increase or at least stay even.  It's when I stray from what I've learned that I head downhill.  

In this posting I will cover several basic topics such as:

- Should beginners learn openings? (and if so, should they avoid learning others)

- Should beginners concern themselves at all with the eternal debate on trading bishops for knights?

- Why you must "humble" your queen (stop developing the queen early)

- How can beginners win more often with the black pieces

- What time controls should beginners play?

- How to contemplate your next move and what you can ask yourself

Part I

"Should beginners learn openings?"

This is sort of a surprising disagreement that many people have.  Some argue that the idea(s) behind most chess openings are filled with theory that's too advanced for a true beginner to handle.  Others suggest that beginners need to know at least several 2 to 4 move openings that are considered sound so they have some sort of "map."

Instead of trying to give a definitive answer I'll just give my opinion for this particular section.

YES and NO.  

Yes, beginners should learn some simple openings.  Openings that are considered "sound," that give an advantage (as white) or that mitigate the opponents advantage (while playing as black) and that are more or less simple.  

Examples;

A.  Queens gambit.  The queens gambit can be played by relative beginners.  While whole books have been written about it and it could be studied for months and months by an individual, the queens gambit should be something most beginners can handle as long as they focus on developing their kingside starting with move three and castling shortly after.

B.  The french defense.  I cannot tell you how many games I've won using the french defense over the last two or three weeks.  I honestly think I've won more games playing the french with the black pieces than I've won playing with the white pieces over the last few weeks.  Often times, players at my level and below, while playing white, simply don't expect the french and play 2. Nf3 (which is practically a mistake) out of habit or they play the exchange variation.. which also gives black equal footing.  Regardless of what your opponent plays, the french seems like it's been forever underrated.  

National Master "OldReb" who frequents the forums here on chess.com commented in a post I read recently and said that he played the french for years with great success.  If I remember correctly he said that he still plays it.  He also mentioned that he played it IN PLACE OF THE SICILIAN when he was a lower rated player because he didn't understand the sicilian or know how to accurately play it.

Here is the second part to my answer:

"No"

No, beginners shouldn't bother a whole lot with complicated openings (most lines of the sicilian for example, or the kings gambit as another example.)  They also shouldn't try to learn 12 different openings in a months or even a years time.  

If you are serious about trying to improve it makes less sense to try to learn really advanced openings that are considered "sharp."  

Again, consider what chess.com member and national master "OldReb" has taught us.  "OldReb" has mentioned in a separate thread that when he was a lower rated player he played the french defense against e4 for years until he became an advanced player and only then did he learn the Sicilian.  You DON'T need to wait as long as OldReb may have to learn something like the Sicilian if you don't want to, it's just a suggestion.

Moving on...

Part II

"Should beginners obsess over the age old debate of trading knights for bishops?"

For the most part... NO.  Although there are some cool things you can learn FROM the existing debate.

You know what I've noticed about this ongoing debate?  High level players rarely engage in it.  Most (practically all) high level players have accepted the idea that bishops are a bit more valuable than knights, particularly when you have each of them.  It is also true that bishops become more valuable as more pawns (and pieces) are captured and removed from play.  That said, the strongest and most utilized defense against 1. d4, the "nimzo-indian" gives white the bishop pair (by sacrificing it's own pair) early in the game and yet it still helps black to score higher against 1. d4 than ANY other defense.  Further, many strong players achieve high winning percentages using a strategy called the "Ruy Lopez exchange" variation, where white gives up his light square bishop early on.  The great Bobby Fischer himself favored the light squared bishop more than any other piece and yet traded it for a knight while playing this opening over and over.

What am I trying to say?  Bishops are in fact more valuable over the course of a long game than knights are.  At least until they lose their partner in crime.  Experienced players don't debate this.  However the difference in value isn't that large and exchanging a bishop for a knight is often times just a matter of personal preference.  A few of the best chess players of all time (i.e. Tigran Petrosian) actually preferred knights. 

If you're a beginner, forget sifting through internet articles to try to figure this out and just play chess and figure out your style.  Petrosian who I alluded to earlier is not just famous for thinking knights were better than bishops but he was actually famous for frequently trading a rook for a minor piece and what he felt was a better long term position for his pieces.  This helps us to understand that a chess game isn't all about what pieces you do and don't have but also where they are placed.

Part III

Why you must "humble your queen."

Check out this game I played about a week ago... I'll add a bit of commentary but this seems like sufficient "evidence" as to why beginners in particular should NOT develop their queen early. 

It's been taught and told time and time again.  If you really want to improve, dancing around the board with your queen and occasionally taking advantage of a few nervous opponents will not actually help you improve.  Any patient player who knows a bit about what they're doing will develop their pieces while attacking and x-raying your queen.  You will have to constantly move your queen and will eventually suffer a huge loss in development.

Moving on...

Part IV

"How beginners can win more often with the black pieces."

I meant to specifically address 1. e4 in this section.  I'm not sure i am knowledgeable enough to give much insight on playing against 1. d4.

When playing against 1. e4 it's good to remember that your opponent has a certain series of moves that they want to play and a certain series of moves that they are used to seeing their opponent play.  Most beginners who play 1. e4 know exactly what they'll play against the philidor and against 2. Nc6.  Some beginners also know exactly what they'll play against the petroff (I do... 3. d4!).  This begs the question; If you could find an opening that is truly simple and thus suitable for beginners, but that's uncommon and will likely throw your opponent off, should you mix it in?  Yes.

I've alluded to how playing the french against 1. e4 has served me better than any other setup but here I wanted to make mention of why.  Playing simple moves that you're opponent doesn't expect and that also interfere with your opponents early intentions benefits you while playing the black pieces.  Playing 1. e4 and then 2. Nf3 doesn't give white an advantage against the french.  Playing 2. Bc4 is even worse for white. It really amazes me at how often my opponent will play 2. Bc4 after I've opened with 1. e6 (the french).  It's like many beginners will just robotically and yet carelessly play the same moves over and over regardless of what their opponent plays.  

For me, the french defense gives me everything I could hope for as black.  You tend to throw your opponent off his game by showing him something unexpected.  You influence part of the center of the board with your pawns rather than your pieces (just my preference, although I think this is key for beginners) and you also transpose into a closed position pretty frequently which I think can benefit black in slowing down whites aggression early on.

I'm not saying you should play the french defense (yes, yes I am).  In fact I'm not even saying you shouldn't play 1. e5 if that's what you prefer.  I suppose what I'm saying is that it pays to have maybe 2 or 3 different setups against both 1. e4 and 1. d5 (which all should probably be simple if you're a true beginner looking to improve).  This way you can sometimes choose an opening that is less common to throw your opponents off and that will yield different positions.  Playing different positions means that you are more likely to improve!

Here I think it's good to add that beginners generally avoid closed positions and doubled pawns far too often.  If you really want to improve you should accept the idea that experienced and advanced players know how to play in closed positions and also know how to play with a doubled pawn.  It seems that very often double pawns come as a result of your opponent trading one of their bishops.  If so, now you can place all your major pieces on squares that are the opposite color of their bishop and place your pawns on the same color (so long as they're protected).  Now your opponents bishop is relatively immobile and non-effective.  As far as closed positions go, many experienced players actually try to induce a closed position when playing as black!  You have to learn how to play these positions or you wont improve a whole heck of a lot.  

Back to the french for a moment.  If you dislike the french because of the potential for closed positions or for other reasons I would maybe recommend the cozio defense.   Again, it's not something many opponents would expect and after 4. Ng6 or 4. a3,play stays pretty simple in my opinion. I do recommend playing the kingside knight to g6 at some point as it stabilizes the position and can give you some attacking chances on the kingside later on if you use your knight and queen in tandem.

Against 1. d4 there is always the queens gambit declined which has a great deal of variations and is good for beginners as far as I can tell.

If you want to throw something in that might catch your opponent off guard and that could lead to a closed (more defensive) position where whites original plan and overall aggression could be frustrated you could try the Benoni.  

Before moving on I've decided to include a game I played with the french recently.  There are some mistakes on both sides but this is the beginners section!  

Part V

"What time controls should beginners play"

This should be the shortest section yet.

The longer the better and blitz and bullet should just be for fun.  You shouldn't expect to improve much by playing shorter time controls. 

Part VI

"How to contemplate your next move"

While contemplating your next move you must do just that!  Contemplate.  While playing blitz and bullet you don't have time to think about your next move.  Unless your last name is Nakamura you probably can't think 7 moves ahead in a single second.  So to piggy back off of the last section, let's repeat the previous lesson; play longer time controls.  This way you have the opportunity to contemplate your moves (and your opponents).

Don't assume that just because you have selected longer time controls you will always contemplate your moves.  Unfortunately many beginners still play at a "blitz" pace while playing a "rapid" game!

Slow down.  Look at each part of the board.  Ask yourself some basic questions and then move onto more in depth questions.  Here are some examples.

1.  Did my opponent just blunder a piece.

Wow... if you're a beginner like me you'd be surprised at how often your opponent hangs a piece and you just carry on with your "plan" that you came up with two moves ago!  Look carefully.

2.  Did my opponent block his own protection (communication) of one of his pieces or pawns that I can now safely capture?

3.  After my opponents move, what pieces or squares are not threatened or easily occupied?

4.  What moves are now available to my opponent that I can prevent or refute. 

5.  Does my move lead to a fork, pin, or does it un-defend one of my pieces?

6.  Do I have a move that serves to purposes?

7.  Does my opponent have two separate pieces working against a single square in my position.  Could he do this in the next few moves?

8. Can my piece be trapped along the side of the board after I make this move?

Gosh, there are so many more questions you can ask yourself before a move.  

Can I prevent my opponent from castling?  Does he only have one bishop?  If yes, can I quickly re-position my major pieces on colors opposite of that bishop?  Can I safely gain space on the queenside in a meaningful way?  

Conclusion

If you made it this far I really do hope this served you well and possibly helps you along the way.  Chess has added alot to my life and I'm always wanting to improve.  I hope you improve alot too as long as it's not enough to beat me ;)

Please feel free to disagree and elaborate on what I've said here.  I welcome criticism.

Nice post

Thank you sir!

Great post ds! Totally fruitful!

Thank you!

I thought it would be good to ask what you guys think about studying endgames more than openings which is something I forgot to include in this post.... haha.

This is pretty good.  I disagree with some of your ideas, but you have a much better grasp of things than the typical 1200.

You can really write essays. I'm much a better chess player but can't write that long or good 😎

Hi,I am happy to help..I am 1800 chess player and I am have this question everytime I play with lower rated players.let me tell you ,I stream chess for 1200-1800 rated players where I highlight opening mistakes ,middle game strategy and mindset of other player and solve tactics live with viewers to solve.I also play games with viewers who wants to taste what 1800 rating looks like where as other high rated don't prefer to play or you ll not be eligible to send them challenge. If you think I can help you to reach atleast 1800 rating in chessdotcom like me, drop me a follow on twitch.tv/corporatechessguy for live streaming, send me a friend request on chessdotcom and you can also subscribe to my youtube channel ( https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=corporatechessguy). Remember you will definitely get better and atleast able to figure out dangers in board when you play with others. Hope to see you around! You can also share with other friends who have interests like you to grow.Thanks!

Thanks for these insights, these can be pretty useful

This is one of my favorite things about the forums honestly.

I've been playing chess for a long time, so when I give advice, for better and worse, it's filtered through those years of experience. Plus, what I tend to say you could find from actual coaches and GMs who will probably say whatever I said only better.

But an advanced beginner's advice is more raw and unique... not necessarily the best advice you'll find of course, but I think it's a valuable addition and worth reading.

I have recently began a youtube chess channel. I analyze master games and share my thinking process in chess. I am also happy to play subscribers. One of the biggest drives for my chess improvement was hanging around with higher rated players and learn from how they think about chess. This is why my channel will be useful to you! Here is a link: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAPbr61Lrt2K3m97w9Zj5vg/featured?sub_confirmation=1 and https://www.twitch.tv/chessinators/ Check it out! Regards,Noam

Nice post! You should have a blog!

I might end up creating one.

Nice! I would love to read it!

What did you think of my Youtube chess channel? You can check it out here: www.youtube.com/channel/UCAPbr61Lrt2K3m97w9Zj5vg/featured?sub_confirmation=1