Sorry, Beginners: Openings DO matter.

Comments on https://lichess.org/@/noahlz/blog/sorry-beginners-openings-do-matter/2YscGmlr

I think the point of the video is to be entertaining and to challenge beginners and the common approach to understand a number of openings. Ben I think is being playful with the title and his comments here and is opening himself up to a broader discussion, ie. think about how much time you might spend on an opening as opposed to other elements in the game. I don't see a whole lot of value in your post because it's already self-evident. Yes openings do matter, but let's challenge the thinking and focus that sits behind it. Yeesh.

noahlz

"I don't see a whole lot of value in your post." Thanks for the comment!

CkickyCheck

I came from your recent post.

Whether openings matter or not isn't a debate, they do and that's simply a fact. What Ben's saying is that begginers shouldn't focus at openings almost at all, because of 2 reasons. 1 there are better ways to get better at chess, like tactics (reviewing our games is a necessity in any sport you want to improve in), puzzles, studying games, videos etc. 2 they do it wrong. Almost everyone does it wrong, glorifying the magic +0.2 number, choosing abstract objectivity over practicality, and memorisation over understanding.

His wording on the other hand...

"Openings don't matter when you want to raise your rating."

This statement is simply untrue. They have smaller influence in boradening your chess understanding, but massive influence on your rating. It's logical and I'm a great example of that. My "training" is coming up with practical opening ideas (most of them don't work), learning and polishing them and reviewing my games, well the start ofmy games — the opening/early middlegame, sometimes later middlegame aswell. And my rating magically goes up.

I had my friend say openings don't matter because his friends are higher–rated than me (that's a shortened version of the argument) and explaining anything to him was... unfruitful, even he had a live example before his very own eyes. So I guess this is my way of getting out the frustration connected to this misleading, and sadly popular sentence, that opening don't matter.

Oh and one more thing, just because you can sometimes win playing 1. a4 doesn't prove openings don't matter (idk how is this even an argument), comparing your results playing 1.a4 to playing well–prepared openings proves or disproves it.

I came from your recent post. Whether openings matter or not isn't a debate, they do and that's simply a fact. What Ben's saying is that begginers shouldn't focus at openings almost at all, because of 2 reasons. 1 there are better ways to get better at chess, like tactics (reviewing our games is a necessity in any sport you want to improve in), puzzles, studying games, videos etc. 2 they do it wrong. Almost everyone does it wrong, glorifying the magic +0.2 number, choosing abstract objectivity over practicality, and memorisation over understanding. His wording on the other hand... "Openings don't matter when you want to raise your rating." This statement is simply untrue. They have smaller influence in boradening your chess understanding, but massive influence on your rating. It's logical and I'm a great example of that. My "training" is coming up with practical opening ideas (most of them don't work), learning and polishing them and reviewing my games, well the start ofmy games — the opening/early middlegame, sometimes later middlegame aswell. And my rating magically goes up. I had my friend say openings don't matter because his friends are higher–rated than me (that's a shortened version of the argument) and explaining anything to him was... unfruitful, even he had a live example before his very own eyes. So I guess this is my way of getting out the frustration connected to this misleading, and sadly popular sentence, that opening don't matter. Oh and one more thing, just because you can sometimes win playing 1. a4 doesn't prove openings don't matter (idk how is this even an argument), comparing your results playing 1.a4 to playing well–prepared openings proves or disproves it.

KindredwithTea

About openings mattering: I will say that studying opening theory specifically never did anything for me (I would just forget everything one day later). What helped me personally in the opening was playing them a lot and looking at games. The thing that actually matters about openings is your understanding of the resulting structures and knowing where the pieces go, not really specific theory (unless you always fall for the same trap ofcourse, but be honest: When did that happen last time?).

Honestly: It's a 1 minute clip from his stream, where he was overexaggerating. I feel like you are taking this a bit too seriously. We also don't really have context. This could be his answer to a "I'm 1500 what openings should I play"- comment, where I think it's a valid response, even if it's exaggerated ofcourse. About openings mattering: I will say that studying opening theory specifically never did anything for me (I would just forget everything one day later). What helped me personally in the opening was playing them a lot and looking at games. The thing that actually matters about openings is your understanding of the resulting structures and knowing where the pieces go, not really specific theory (unless you always fall for the same trap ofcourse, but be honest: When did that happen last time?).

Wodjul edited

@noahlz ,

I am late to this topic.

I agree with the blog post. Openings do matter to beginners other than maybe rank beginners who have just learned the moves. Rookies like me who are are just beyond rank beginner hit a plateau soon enough. We cannot get beyond it for ages or forever (it feels like). Getting busted over and over in the opening is a big part of this.

There are so many openings played these days online and there are so many traps in them. You are doomed to a lot of painful miniature losses if you don't know some opening theory. There is not enough time, even in Rapid 15+10, to figure out your way through tricks, traps, unusual openings and unusual lines.

To know openings as a beginner / rookie you first need to know or find out the meta of opening study and opening repertoire. How does one study and remember (enough of) openings? How does one select a repertoire? There is a wealth of misleading material and bad advice out there on the internet. I mean most of the online streamers and gurus plus even some outright charlatans, who will tell you things from "you don't need to learn openings", to "you only need general opening principles" (yes, you need them but you need more too), to "you don't need openings, just study tactics". That final piece of advice would be great if the human brain was an inorganic computer like your desktop or laptop, but it isn't.

What do I mean by the "meta of opening study?" for beginners and rookies who in particular happen to be adult improvers. The meta in this sense is what should you study and not study and how narrow or wide should your repertoire be? I got some rating improvement at one point by just playing system openings but of course I still hit a plateau. I was told I needed to study tactics (which was and is true). And Andras Toth's online advice is to not stick with system openings because you are not learning all that chess can be or about pawn structures other than your system structure. I also decided that, since I was studying tactics, I needed to play tactical openings to supplement the tactics study. I think this decision was right in theory. In practice it has become really difficult but I didn't want to stay stuck in one system opening.

I think a beginner / rookie adult improver should try "proper openings" (not systems) but should endeavour to keep the repertoire as limited as possible. I chose e4 as white but straight away this leads to the need for a lot of opening theory. You can face a lot of possible responses. You will need to learn at a minimum;

(a) Giuoco Piano or Ruy Lopez, many lines in either. I tried Ruy Lopez and that's been mistake.
(b) White against French Defence
(c) White against Sicilian Defence
(d) White against Caro-Kan
(e) White against Modern
(f) White against KID
(g) White against Owen.... and the list goes one.

Then as Black you will face e4, d4, English, Larsen and many other odd white openings.

There is no "one opening that fits all" even for black except maybe the KID as black but then you must know many variations for all the white setups.

The reality is you have to study everything at every level, beginner to whatever. Just spread it across the board and study everything a bit to try and lift your level in each thing a little bit keep them even and rinse and repeat. At least that I is how I see it. But still nothing is working for me so what would I know?

However, people who became expert or better at chess before age 20 simply have no idea how hard adult improvement is in chess. Either that or they do have an idea but they are not addressing us. They are talking to much younger people who still have a good chance of getting competent at chess, not a remote chance like adult improvers.

@noahlz , I am late to this topic. I agree with the blog post. Openings do matter to beginners other than maybe rank beginners who have just learned the moves. Rookies like me who are are just beyond rank beginner hit a plateau soon enough. We cannot get beyond it for ages or forever (it feels like). Getting busted over and over in the opening is a big part of this. There are so many openings played these days online and there are so many traps in them. You are doomed to a lot of painful miniature losses if you don't know some opening theory. There is not enough time, even in Rapid 15+10, to figure out your way through tricks, traps, unusual openings and unusual lines. To know openings as a beginner / rookie you first need to know or find out the meta of opening study and opening repertoire. How does one study and remember (enough of) openings? How does one select a repertoire? There is a wealth of misleading material and bad advice out there on the internet. I mean most of the online streamers and gurus plus even some outright charlatans, who will tell you things from "you don't need to learn openings", to "you only need general opening principles" (yes, you need them but you need more too), to "you don't need openings, just study tactics". That final piece of advice would be great if the human brain was an inorganic computer like your desktop or laptop, but it isn't. What do I mean by the "meta of opening study?" for beginners and rookies who in particular happen to be adult improvers. The meta in this sense is what should you study and not study and how narrow or wide should your repertoire be? I got some rating improvement at one point by just playing system openings but of course I still hit a plateau. I was told I needed to study tactics (which was and is true). And Andras Toth's online advice is to not stick with system openings because you are not learning all that chess can be or about pawn structures other than your system structure. I also decided that, since I was studying tactics, I needed to play tactical openings to supplement the tactics study. I think this decision was right in theory. In practice it has become really difficult but I didn't want to stay stuck in one system opening. I think a beginner / rookie adult improver should try "proper openings" (not systems) but should endeavour to keep the repertoire as limited as possible. I chose e4 as white but straight away this leads to the need for a lot of opening theory. You can face a lot of possible responses. You will need to learn at a minimum; (a) Giuoco Piano or Ruy Lopez, many lines in either. I tried Ruy Lopez and that's been mistake. (b) White against French Defence (c) White against Sicilian Defence (d) White against Caro-Kan (e) White against Modern (f) White against KID (g) White against Owen.... and the list goes one. Then as Black you will face e4, d4, English, Larsen and many other odd white openings. There is no "one opening that fits all" even for black except maybe the KID as black but then you must know many variations for all the white setups. The reality is you have to study everything at every level, beginner to whatever. Just spread it across the board and study everything a bit to try and lift your level in each thing a little bit keep them even and rinse and repeat. At least that I is how I see it. But still nothing is working for me so what would I know? However, people who became expert or better at chess before age 20 simply have no idea how hard adult improvement is in chess. Either that or they do have an idea but they are not addressing us. They are talking to much younger people who still have a good chance of getting competent at chess, not a remote chance like adult improvers.

noahlz

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I'm also a fan of Andras Toth! I play e4 because I want to get better. I lose a lot but I definitely feel I've learned a lot more about Chess in the past 2 years.

CkickyCheck

@Wodjul said in #6:

@noahlz
I also decided that, since I was studying tactics, I needed to play tactical openings to supplement the tactics study.

It's assumed 1.e4 is tactical and 1.d4 is positional. I kinda have the same mindset, but that's so far from reality, every opening that has active play has tactics. I realized that watching my friend's last couple of games in the Catalan. And there are simpler dynamic alternatives like Jobava London or the Reti. In the right hands almost any opening can lead to dynamic play and therefore to tactics.

I think a beginner / rookie adult improver should try "proper openings" (not systems) but should endeavour to keep the repertoire as limited as possible.

I do believe systems are double-edged, they let you focus more energy into less, but you quicly get attached to them. If you know when to swap they are the best. By "proper openings" I assume you mean top level mainlines, if so that's wrong. At your level you aim to understand the positions you get (at begginer you aim just to get a playable position, so Ruy Lopez is great), not just play them, and you will NEVER understand Ruy Lopez or the slow Italians.

I chose e4 as white but straight away this leads to the need for a lot of opening theory. You will need to learn at a minimum:
(a) Giuoco Piano or Ruy Lopez, many lines in either. I tried Ruy Lopez and that's been mistake.

That's wrong, there are much simpler alternatives to e5 - Centre Game (2.d4 - castle queenside), Ponziani (2.Nf3 3.c3 - play for d4), Vienna (2.Nc3 - play for f4), but there is little to none online material on them, so it's hard to discover them on your own. Just dont play 2.Nf3 3.Bb5/Bc4

(c) White against Sicilian Defence

You can get similar moves against e5 and c5, Ponziani-Alapin, Vienna-Grand Prix, Centre Game-2.d4 3.Qxd4

(b) White against French Defence
(d) White against Caro-Kan

That's true, while rare, they are very unique defences, so they require something different, but you still can play similar setups against both - 2 Knights, Exchange, Advance or KIA. You can also mix French and Sicilian repertoires in some cases.

(e) White against Modern
(f) White against KID
(g) White against Owen

You don't need lines against those, you can (and should) just choose one or two anti-bs setup and play that, like the Austrian Attack (e4 d4 Nc3 e4 f4), English Attack (e4 d4 Nc3 f3 Be3 Qd2), 2 Knights (e4 d4 Nf3 Nc3), Idk if this has a name (e4 d4 Bd3 Qe2 Nf3 c3 Nbd2)

There is no "one opening that fits all" even for black.

There is the c6-d5 caro/slav you can play against anything, and KID/Pirc. I think Caro is AMAZING at your level because it exposes you to so many different structures. But it does require study time, as I think in the Caro White has the most traps out of any openings.

@Wodjul said in #6: > @noahlz > I also decided that, since I was studying tactics, I needed to play tactical openings to supplement the tactics study. It's assumed 1.e4 is tactical and 1.d4 is positional. I kinda have the same mindset, but that's so far from reality, every opening that has active play has tactics. I realized that watching my friend's last couple of games in the Catalan. And there are simpler dynamic alternatives like Jobava London or the Reti. In the right hands almost any opening can lead to dynamic play and therefore to tactics. > I think a beginner / rookie adult improver should try "proper openings" (not systems) but should endeavour to keep the repertoire as limited as possible. I do believe systems are double-edged, they let you focus more energy into less, but you quicly get attached to them. If you know when to swap they are the best. By "proper openings" I assume you mean top level mainlines, if so that's wrong. At your level you aim to understand the positions you get (at begginer you aim just to get a playable position, so Ruy Lopez is great), not just play them, and you will NEVER understand Ruy Lopez or the slow Italians. > I chose e4 as white but straight away this leads to the need for a lot of opening theory. You will need to learn at a minimum: > (a) Giuoco Piano or Ruy Lopez, many lines in either. I tried Ruy Lopez and that's been mistake. That's wrong, there are much simpler alternatives to e5 - Centre Game (2.d4 - castle queenside), Ponziani (2.Nf3 3.c3 - play for d4), Vienna (2.Nc3 - play for f4), but there is little to none online material on them, so it's hard to discover them on your own. Just dont play 2.Nf3 3.Bb5/Bc4 > (c) White against Sicilian Defence You can get similar moves against e5 and c5, Ponziani-Alapin, Vienna-Grand Prix, Centre Game-2.d4 3.Qxd4 > (b) White against French Defence > (d) White against Caro-Kan That's true, while rare, they are very unique defences, so they require something different, but you still can play similar setups against both - 2 Knights, Exchange, Advance or KIA. You can also mix French and Sicilian repertoires in some cases. > (e) White against Modern > (f) White against KID > (g) White against Owen You don't need lines against those, you can (and should) just choose one or two anti-bs setup and play that, like the Austrian Attack (e4 d4 Nc3 e4 f4), English Attack (e4 d4 Nc3 f3 Be3 Qd2), 2 Knights (e4 d4 Nf3 Nc3), Idk if this has a name (e4 d4 Bd3 Qe2 Nf3 c3 Nbd2) > There is no "one opening that fits all" even for black. There is the c6-d5 caro/slav you can play against anything, and KID/Pirc. I think Caro is AMAZING at your level because it exposes you to so many different structures. But it does require study time, as I think in the Caro White has the most traps out of any openings.

Lukeysh

Honestly im just a no name guy but i think it depends on the opening

rohitraj_iit

#10

Openings are like time management. Neither will raise your rating, but can tank many hundreds of elo rating points.

If you are positionally busted after opening, then your opponent will have many more tactics to finish you off. Either you will lose on time or miss one of the tactics.

So you have to have enough opening knowledge not to be worse after opening in the majority of your games. I do not spend much time on learning openings. But I analyse each of my games where I lost after opening. I do not care if I am not playing theory. I target that I am not more than 0.5-1 points worse after the opening phase.

Openings are like time management. Neither will raise your rating, but can tank many hundreds of elo rating points. If you are positionally busted after opening, then your opponent will have many more tactics to finish you off. Either you will lose on time or miss one of the tactics. So you have to have enough opening knowledge not to be worse after opening in the majority of your games. I do not spend much time on learning openings. But I analyse each of my games where I lost after opening. I do not care if I am not playing theory. I target that I am not more than 0.5-1 points worse after the opening phase.