Classifying openings: sharp and theory-heavy vs slow, quiet and theory-light • page 2/2 • General Chess Discussion • lichess.org

Like it or not, any chess player has to make SOME sort of choice about how to start a game. It is a very understandable impulse to attempt to systematically organize the available information about the various possibilities and make a considered decision about what to use. It just turns out that that idea is not very practical. So, what to do?
"... How should we lay the foundations of our opening repertoire? It is hard to come up with a single answer to satisfy every player. Individuals will have different objectives in the opening, as well as different playing strengths. Nevertheless, to all players I can recommend the following: SIMPLICITY and ECONOMY. ..." - GM Lajos Portisch (1974)
I would add the suggestion that one resign oneself to a period of experimentation, while browsing among the various options in search of something that seems to suit one’s current tastes.

Like it or not, any chess player has to make SOME sort of choice about how to start a game. It is a very understandable impulse to attempt to systematically organize the available information about the various possibilities and make a considered decision about what to use. It just turns out that that idea is not very practical. So, what to do? "... How should we lay the foundations of our opening repertoire? It is hard to come up with a single answer to satisfy every player. Individuals will have different objectives in the opening, as well as different playing strengths. Nevertheless, to all players I can recommend the following: SIMPLICITY and ECONOMY. ..." - GM Lajos Portisch (1974) I would add the suggestion that one resign oneself to a period of experimentation, while browsing among the various options in search of something that seems to suit one’s current tastes.

kindaspongey edited

#12

Here is an example of the sort of issue that one might want to think about:
"... For players with a brilliant memory ... it makes sense to include in their opening repertoire complicated modern opening systems, where there is a great deal of theory, you have to know an enormous number of games, and remember various subtleties. ...
... players with a good memory ... can permit themselves to vary their opening repertoire and employ different openings, ...
For players with a less good memory it is dangerous to embark on such a course. .... It is better to aim for 'opening schemes' -- logical systems with less theory, in which what is more important is an understanding of position and a knowledge of typical ideas and methods, rather than specific details or precise move orders. ..." - IM Mark Dvoretsky
So, at first, it seems like it would be a great idea to have a general reference where one could look up the memory requirements of any particular opening, but one just has to contemplate that for a short time before problems become apparent. For a start, there is no measure for the amount of required memory. Choose a number from 1 to 10? Who is going to pick the number? Will any two authorities choose the same number? Won’t the (supposedly) appropriate number depend on the specific chosen variations? Also, won’t the required memory depend on the level of the opponents that one typically encounters? Won’t the amount of required memory depend on how well one understands the opening? For any particular player is it hard or easy or somewhere-in-between to remember 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 a6 4 Ba4 Nf6 5 O-O Be7 6 Re1 b5 7 Bb3 d6 8 c3 O-O 9 h3 ?

Here is an example of the sort of issue that one might want to think about: "... For players with a brilliant memory ... it makes sense to include in their opening repertoire complicated modern opening systems, where there is a great deal of theory, you have to know an enormous number of games, and remember various subtleties. ... ... players with a good memory ... can permit themselves to vary their opening repertoire and employ different openings, ... For players with a less good memory it is dangerous to embark on such a course. .... It is better to aim for 'opening schemes' -- logical systems with less theory, in which what is more important is an understanding of position and a knowledge of typical ideas and methods, rather than specific details or precise move orders. ..." - IM Mark Dvoretsky So, at first, it seems like it would be a great idea to have a general reference where one could look up the memory requirements of any particular opening, but one just has to contemplate that for a short time before problems become apparent. For a start, there is no measure for the amount of required memory. Choose a number from 1 to 10? Who is going to pick the number? Will any two authorities choose the same number? Won’t the (supposedly) appropriate number depend on the specific chosen variations? Also, won’t the required memory depend on the level of the opponents that one typically encounters? Won’t the amount of required memory depend on how well one understands the opening? For any particular player is it hard or easy or somewhere-in-between to remember 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 a6 4 Ba4 Nf6 5 O-O Be7 6 Re1 b5 7 Bb3 d6 8 c3 O-O 9 h3 ?