Comments on https://lichess.org/@/totalnoob69/blog/spaced-repetition-opening-moves-a-good-idea-or-a-really-bad-one/8reTtHu6
Its really bad Since you memorize and don"t understand the ideas., unless you over-exert yourself trying to understand it. lost WAYYYYYYYYYYY too many games like this
I want to talk to you privately. please.
have a good day!
@TotalNoob69 Nice Blog.
Why not have spaced repetition. It'll help learn openings faster. You say that spaced repetition can result in your play crashing after the opening moves. What that means is that doing spaced repetition alone is not enough, you need other things like practice and experience and studying model games.
That AI thumbnail is disgusting lol:
*5x6 board*
*Pawns on the first rank*
*Pieces on 3 sides*
*Missing pieces*
*Disembodied astronauts with their torsos sliced*
Ha ha, @RuyLopez1000 , you are right. I had 5 minutes of time so I made a punny spaced repetition thumbnail.
I will maybe update it, but I really leaned into how bad it was and now I kind of dig it. You know "fascist, but in an ironic way" :)
I would say that the order of the tools used for learning matters. In this context, I would only recommend spaced repetition *after* everything else and definitely not the first thing to try.
> What's your favorite way of learning chess?
I love working on openings, it's like problem–solving for me. For example, how can I play e5 against Nf3–g3, or how can I play open Sicilian, but still avoid opponent's home territory? I come up with multitude of bad ideas just for one to work, or sometimes the engine shows a move so unexpected I must look deeper into it (1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bg5 Ne4 4.Bh4 Qd6 5.e3? Qh6!), or I see something in a game.
Then the way I learn them is by writing blogs. They force me to explain positions, which isn't possible if I don't understand them. Also they are structured, so my study time isn't all spread randomly
A simulation in space
I started playing chess when I was 25, and in the beginning i was really nervous. I got placed in the last team, last board right away, and nerves were really a problem. Then i discovered a spaced repetition opening trainer, and that was (and still is) so much fun. And it really helped me in the beginning to calm down otb. I could just start playing moves i knew by heart.
Now nervousness isnt really a problem anymore, I'm almost 1770 elo, i still use the spaced repetition trainer, and people in my club up to 2000 elo look for ways to dodge my openings. Cause they know, i uploaded Quality Chess Opening books, and if they're not careful, they are worse pretty quickly. We have quite a lot players who are "better at chess" (whatever that means), but almost always I get a pretty good position out of the opening, and thus can keep up.
Also I really hate playing worse positions. Of course that still happens, but in the middle game, and not because i made some mistakes in the opening.
In short: Yes, spaced repetition opening trainer is really cool, whatever level you are.
By just using spaced repetition to memorize moves is the wrong way of using it. Sure, in the short term, you might remember it, but you will forget about it pretty quickly. It is the same thing learning new subjects in school, you need to keep asking questions to understand what are you trying to learn. Here, you will need to ask why is this recommended moves good over the other moves. The author may choose this move because it leads to an easier to understand and to play position, or maybe it leads to certain tactics. Another great thing about spaced repetition is that you don't always need to review 70-100 variations every time. It will help you cut down a lot of time by only asking you to review some of the variations based on a timer or a popular position.
Personally my biggest complaint about most opening trainers is that they have you practice opening variations in a completely unintuitive way that makes codifying it into your mind highly unlikely. Not always this extreme but it'll have you practice a rare sideline in the French and then immediately afterwards a completely different sideline in the Sicilian for example.
In my opinion the best way I've found for opening study is to first learn and understand the very most common variations (also not to extreme depth) and in the process analyze many master games in that opening/variation even if the game diverges from the exact variation you want to play. In this way you come to understand many common plans and themes within the opening and even if they aren't what you intend to play they deepen your understanding and add tools to your toolbox. Once you/I fairly thoroughly understand these most essential lines and plans then slowly branch out into either deeper variations or less common ones.
Truth be told though I think that for most players under say 2300-2400 fide I really do imagine working on other things to be an actually stronger Chess player to simply be more efficient. Of course every player, even those in the low 1000s ought to learn a bit in the opening, say 15-20 variations total but learning hundreds of variations that can follow 1. d4 for White or trying to be completely booked up in the Ruy Lopez, or trying to somehow master Najdorf or Sveshnikov Sicilian theory all seem to be things that feel much more useful than they actually are when you consider that for most variations and positions you may be able to expect them once every 100-200 games (or really much less) depending on how broad and/or deep you're going.