Your network blocks the Lichess assets!

lichess.org
Donate

You’re studying chess openings the wrong way (do this instead)

Very much agreed as I have similar experience

Very much agreed as I have similar experience

@mvhk said ^

@datajunkie

Almost simultaneously published as your article.
https://lichess.org/@/MattyDPerrine/blog/stop-gatekeeping-opening-study/hSDchO4E

Oh, we read each other's blogs on Substack. Sometimes we're bound to write on the same kind of topic - my original one was published 4 weeks ago.

@mvhk said [^](/forum/redirect/post/R1nnfieS) > @datajunkie > > Almost simultaneously published as your article. > https://lichess.org/@/MattyDPerrine/blog/stop-gatekeeping-opening-study/hSDchO4E Oh, we read each other's blogs on Substack. Sometimes we're bound to write on the same kind of topic - my original one was published 4 weeks ago.

As usual, I deepy enjoy your writings

As usual, I deepy enjoy your writings

This article is quite well done and will prove of value to players from beginner to (at least) 21-2200 FIDE, my playing strength in my best days.

This article is quite well done and will prove of value to players from beginner to (at least) 21-2200 FIDE, my playing strength in my best days.

So I tend to look at a lot of model games and stem games. In each particular line to get to GM level you probably need at least five games and analyse them very very well.

Model or stem games are mentioned everywhere (e.g. by Andras Toth) but no one really explains where you should find them and what makes a good stem game. Take, for example, the Two Knights defence, Jan Piński has a book on this opening from 2004. It contains a lot of annotated games. Are any five of them good for use as model games? Maybe none of them are as the annotations are over 20 years old and possible completely false today.

Can you even take those stem games from books or do you have to pick five random games in your opening of choice and fully annotate them yourself?

> So I tend to look at a lot of model games and stem games. In each particular line to get to GM level you probably need at least five games and analyse them very very well. Model or stem games are mentioned everywhere (e.g. by Andras Toth) but no one really explains where you should find them and what makes a good stem game. Take, for example, the Two Knights defence, Jan Piński has a book on this opening from 2004. It contains a lot of annotated games. Are any five of them good for use as model games? Maybe none of them are as the annotations are over 20 years old and possible completely false today. Can you even take those stem games from books or do you have to pick five random games in your opening of choice and fully annotate them yourself?

It’s nice to see more and more people pushing the same idea that openings are often overstudied. But I still think there’s an open question here: where do you actually draw the line? When does “enough opening knowledge” end?

As a Sicilian player, for example, there are so many sharp and aggressive lines where you need very precise defense. So how far do you really need to know it? Is it enough to understand the key idea and the best defensive move, or do you need to know the line until things simplify and the attack is clearly over?

That’s where I still see the difficulty. In some variations, especially the chaotic ones, it feels like you simply need concrete knowledge. Otherwise you’re just lost.

It’s nice to see more and more people pushing the same idea that openings are often overstudied. But I still think there’s an open question here: where do you actually draw the line? When does “enough opening knowledge” end? As a Sicilian player, for example, there are so many sharp and aggressive lines where you need very precise defense. So how far do you really need to know it? Is it enough to understand the key idea and the best defensive move, or do you need to know the line until things simplify and the attack is clearly over? That’s where I still see the difficulty. In some variations, especially the chaotic ones, it feels like you simply need concrete knowledge. Otherwise you’re just lost.

cool I love it thanks

cool I love it thanks

HI IM, I remember seeing your name in tournaments like long time ago (Back when Max is still FM) when I was having tournaments in aussie, good to hear you're an IM now, when you mention about calculation and time management, I was like oh that's my main weakness atm too XD Good to know you managed to overcame it somehow

HI IM, I remember seeing your name in tournaments like long time ago (Back when Max is still FM) when I was having tournaments in aussie, good to hear you're an IM now, when you mention about calculation and time management, I was like oh that's my main weakness atm too XD Good to know you managed to overcame it somehow