Sad that thread thread was ruined by people just spouting that it is rubbish. So many narrow minded non creatives in chess these days.
@Nicktastic said in #12:
> Sad that thread thread was ruined by people just spouting that it is rubbish. So many narrow minded non creatives in chess these days.
Is not that. Its just that the opening is bad. Its not worth studying it.
If you want to play a wild game like that, just do it and wing it. If you are going to play a bad opening, its actually more fun AND useful to have almost no knowledge of that opening, as it forces you to actually find the better moves by yourself, rather than wasting a couple hours studying it, which will be a waste since you are not gonna play that in a serious game, nor its useful, because you are regurgitating moves instead of playing yourself, and you still are gonna find yourself in an unpleasant position and probably lose anyways. Just play it, dont need to study it.
> Sad that thread thread was ruined by people just spouting that it is rubbish. So many narrow minded non creatives in chess these days.
Is not that. Its just that the opening is bad. Its not worth studying it.
If you want to play a wild game like that, just do it and wing it. If you are going to play a bad opening, its actually more fun AND useful to have almost no knowledge of that opening, as it forces you to actually find the better moves by yourself, rather than wasting a couple hours studying it, which will be a waste since you are not gonna play that in a serious game, nor its useful, because you are regurgitating moves instead of playing yourself, and you still are gonna find yourself in an unpleasant position and probably lose anyways. Just play it, dont need to study it.
<Comment deleted by user>
Bounce bounce, wiggle wiggle
@Alientcp said in #13:
> Is not that. Its just that the opening is bad. Its not worth studying it.
>
> If you want to play a wild game like that, just do it and wing it. If you are going to play a bad opening, its actually more fun AND useful to have almost no knowledge of that opening, as it forces you to actually find the better moves by yourself, rather than wasting a couple hours studying it, which will be a waste since you are not gonna play that in a serious game, nor its useful, because you are regurgitating moves instead of playing yourself, and you still are gonna find yourself in an unpleasant position and probably lose anyways. Just play it, dont need to study it.
F4 has 50% winrate actually(lichess) and has been played by gms and have won with it
> Is not that. Its just that the opening is bad. Its not worth studying it.
>
> If you want to play a wild game like that, just do it and wing it. If you are going to play a bad opening, its actually more fun AND useful to have almost no knowledge of that opening, as it forces you to actually find the better moves by yourself, rather than wasting a couple hours studying it, which will be a waste since you are not gonna play that in a serious game, nor its useful, because you are regurgitating moves instead of playing yourself, and you still are gonna find yourself in an unpleasant position and probably lose anyways. Just play it, dont need to study it.
F4 has 50% winrate actually(lichess) and has been played by gms and have won with it
@Ben10Tenyson said in #16:
> F4 has 50% winrate actually(lichess) and has been played by gms and have won with it
Check the Masters database and you will see a different picture.
I wont stop you from playing anything, its just an advice that studying that is a waste of time. People have won with the bongcluod as well, but you dont see anyone recommending it.
You are playing, as much, for an equal ish game. There are plenty of openings that fight for advantages.
> F4 has 50% winrate actually(lichess) and has been played by gms and have won with it
Check the Masters database and you will see a different picture.
I wont stop you from playing anything, its just an advice that studying that is a waste of time. People have won with the bongcluod as well, but you dont see anyone recommending it.
You are playing, as much, for an equal ish game. There are plenty of openings that fight for advantages.
Most people in lichess isnt masters and no opening provides decent opening advantage (difference of 0.4 or similar engine advantage at most) which is easily offset by mistakes or blunders at below gm level
@Alientcp said in #17:
> Check the Masters database and you will see a different picture.
I think you see my point. The study is not for Masters, it is for club players. Statistics in the Masters database have no relevance in this situation.
@Alientcp said in #13:
> Its just that the opening is bad. Its not worth studying it.
Studying the opening may be a waste of time for you, but apparently not for your opponents, who have a winning record against you when playing it. I would offer that as evidence that there just might be something there for those who do study it.
> Check the Masters database and you will see a different picture.
I think you see my point. The study is not for Masters, it is for club players. Statistics in the Masters database have no relevance in this situation.
@Alientcp said in #13:
> Its just that the opening is bad. Its not worth studying it.
Studying the opening may be a waste of time for you, but apparently not for your opponents, who have a winning record against you when playing it. I would offer that as evidence that there just might be something there for those who do study it.
I wonder why people fight the inevitable if they want to proceed on the journey of learning Chess & friggin' STUDY
@ThunderClap said in #20:
> I wonder why people fight the inevitable if they want to proceed on the journey of learning Chess & friggin' STUDY
I can't imagine master lines will be followed by opponents under 2200 tbh...I think learning openings played by masters U2000 is a waste of energy, best to just get a general idea of the principles in openings and actually think and use your brain and better to learn how to create combinational finishes in your attacks and how to analyze better in the middle game those are the powerful tools imo
> I wonder why people fight the inevitable if they want to proceed on the journey of learning Chess & friggin' STUDY
I can't imagine master lines will be followed by opponents under 2200 tbh...I think learning openings played by masters U2000 is a waste of energy, best to just get a general idea of the principles in openings and actually think and use your brain and better to learn how to create combinational finishes in your attacks and how to analyze better in the middle game those are the powerful tools imo
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.