Chess: Glee v Chessic Sense

The Game Room
81

Please do!

Firstly I’m not sure if it’s of any use to define the ‘end’ of an opening.

Secondly some openings lead to early exchanges (1), whilst some openings are heavily analysed (2).

Anyway if you want ‘definitions’ of when an opening ends, here are some to play with:

  • after 6 moves by each side
  • after 10 moves by each side
  • when one player connects their rooks
  • when the position is not a ‘book’ one (i.e. not a published opening position)
  • when one player sinks into thought

(1) 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6 5. d4 exd4 6. Qxd4 Qxd4 7. Nxd4
(2) I’ve played the same 12 moves at least twice, and some Grandmaster games only have a new move at move 30!

The English opening usually starts with 1. c4.

A. It has many transpositions, e.g. into:

  • Queen’s Gambit
  • Caro-Kann (which usually starts 1. e4!)
  • King’s Indian
  • Nimzo-Indian
  • Grunfeld

B. It has many variations:

  • symmetrical
  • reversed Sicilian
  • Dutch

Sadly your video is complete crap - the author doesn’t even know what an ‘outpost’ is and thinks there is one line that is the ‘English Book line’. :smack:

C. If you want to see a ‘typical’ line in the English, here’s one:

  1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. g3 Bc5 4. Bg2 OO 5. Nf3 d6 6. OO Nc6,

where White will try either to push in the centre with e3 + d4, or play a3 and b4 (expanding the range of his g2 bishop.

I’ve never played 1.d4! :eek: :cool: :confused:

However I have sat next to a lot of strong players and watched their games (plus I’ve played through a lot of games in magazines.)

Um, I don’t want to sound arrogant (or pretentious), but playing a training game for three minutes a day without using a board is a long way from tournament chess. :o
Nevertheless it was interesting to play 1.d4 (and to see a Saemisch Nimzo-Indian middle game from White’s point of view.)

I’m glad you enjoyed it and I hope others did too.

82

I think some people have confused you with poor advice :eek:

I don’t think the difference between a ‘relative’ pin and an ‘absolute’ pin matters at all. (I’ve never used it in 52 years of playing and teaching chess.)
You should play through lots of examples of tactics (like pins), so that you learn:

  • what sort of positions they occur in
  • when the pin is strong
  • when the pin can be successfully broken (and how)

The rules / laws of chess state how the pieces move and how players should play the game (e.g. using clock, offering draws.)

“Don’t move the same piece twice in the opening” is not a rule, **nor **a law.
It’s simply a rough guideline for beginners. You should drop these guidelines as soon as possible, understand the game and start thinking for yourself.

The Ruy Lopez has been a classical opening for over 500 years. it is respectable, heavily analysed and used by World Champions.
The main line begins 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6…
if at this point White decides to follow the ‘rule’ and not to move his bishop for the second time, he will lose a piece and the game. :rolleyes:

83

But obviously it does. :confused:
Moving out of an absolute pin is illegal.
Moving out of a relative pin is legal.

I’m not disagreeing with your points, but I’m also not understanding.

84

Sorry if I not explaining myself well.

Yes, a pin against the King means that piece can’t legally move. That’s all you need to know.
Learning phrases like ‘absolute pin’ and ‘relative pin’ doesn’t improve your knowledge of chess.

As I’ve said in other threads, it’s important to learn:

  • how to checkmate against a bare King
  • basic endings
  • tactics (this is best done by practising loads of ‘White to play and win’ positions)

I’m nervous about stuff you’ve been shown like:

  • ‘absolute pin’ and ‘relative pin’
  • that video from the Internet
  • guidelines you need to move on from asap
85

Don’t mistake my not understanding for not explaining yourself well.

I’m not getting why the terminology is so important… is it that learning jargon isn’t learning chess? (Or something like that?)

I always thought that the important part of distinguishing between an,… er… King pin and a pin on any other piece was that–while you might not want to–you can move out of a pin that is a pin against a piece other than the King.

Let me offer a ridiculously simple example.

White has Black’s Bishop pinned, but if it’s Black to move, Be3 is winning (sacrificing the Bishop for a Queen).

And I’m sorry for choosing a crappy video. I had a question about openings and I chose the English because it’s got ‘opening’ in the name. I chose the video because it went fairly deep into the game (by number of moves) as compared to the wiki page which basically calls the English opening 1.c4 (before going into greater detail.

86

Your politeness is appreciated! :slight_smile:

Absolutely.
Chess is a full information game (the only difficulty is the truly massive number of possibilities.)
There’s no substitute for playing experience and pattern recognition.
Useful definitions help players discuss things: jargon wastes their time…

You don’t need to distinguish between ‘King pins’ or any other sort of pin. You don’t need a name for it.
The only thing you need is to see (and know how to describe) is which moves are legal.

No worries - it all helps people see how to learn chess.

Defining openings is rather tricky e.g.:

  1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. exd5 cxd5 4. c4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e6

Two openings; one final position! :cool:

87

(I don’t know why this didn’t appear in the preceding post.)

88

I would like to hear feedback on this video, which offers suggestions I find to be helpful, but which also refernces “absolute” and “relative” pins–if only for discursive value.

89

…or references even (missed the edit widow).

90

I can say with full conviction that Daniel Rensch is one of the best modern-day teachers there is. He has the ability to really break things down into simple terms in ways that his compatriots, like Sam Shankland or David Pruess, struggle to do. So whatever he’s saying in those videos is undoubtedly true.

SiXSwordS, if you’re a Chess.com member, I’ll be happy to play a live game against you and analyze it afterward. You (or anyone else) can PM me if you want to take me up. I’m in the Eastern U.S. time zone, FYI.

91

I’ll take you up on that, although it might be a little while.

What is the best way to meet-up? I’ve only been a member for a little while, so I’ve only played half hour games with whoever I was paired up against (1W/3L/1D) :(.