Just play regular chess with some spirit, like Reti bamboozling your opponent.
Chess960 is a small variant with some aficionados, probably smaller than some other variants. They tried to boost it ten years ago, in vain. It will always be a minority attack with no real importance amongst most club players. We don’t play, we don’t talk about it. In the forum where I am mod I made a poll - a disaster. Practically no one cares.
Exception: some GMs are invited and paid - they have to like it. :D
The videos say they will concentrate on "depth", rather than "breadth". Yes, it is easy to memorise 20 to 25 moves of a single "deep" line. The problem is that your opponent would have to make every single one of those precise moves along with you, for the memorisation to be of any use. If all you've done is memorise, a single variation would destroy you. How many more or less normal variations are there to one single line? Obviously there is a tree, with variations that multiply exponentially. Unless you want to memorise 150 "deep" lines for a single opening, you are much better off beginning with understanding principles: controlling the centre, developing, space, mobility, and rules of thumb: avoid moving the same piece twice before others are developed, connect the rooks, etc.
I add to my memorisation with computer analysis of games, typically after encountering a variation to which I did not reply well. But the depth is usually from 5 or 6 to 15, not 20 to 25. But at all depth levels I want to see breadth and depth together, and understand the various strategies. The computer is very helpful because one can try endless variations (breadth): what if he does this? What about that?
@nayfExaggeration is the best way to destroy an argument.
Thinking deep is ONE necessity one part of the way to get better. Thinking broad is the other part. Each at its time.
@jupp53 We agree, you need both breadth and depth. I agree as well that you can get something out of learning a single deep line if you follow the strategies; however you would get much more by building up breadth at a less deep level.
The best way to study middle game is studying endgame. The best way to study opening is sudying middlegame.
By studying isolani, hedgehog, caro-slav, QGD exchange variation, strcutures (etc..) we learn how to play when we reach that typical positions... Total alien positions is not common, we reach always some well defined middlegame with well defined plans, pawn-breaks, etc..
Chess Structures - A Grandmaster Guide by Mauricio Flores Rios
Sokolov, Ivan - Winning Chess Middlegames An Essential Guide to Pawn Structures
Leininger, Robert - Middlegame Strategy With the Carlsbad Pawn Structure
Baburin, Alexander - Winning Pawn Structures
Soltis, Andrew - Pawn Structure Chess
Beliavsky, Alexander & Mikhalchischin, Adrian - Isolani Strategy - Strengths and Weaknesses of the Isolated Queen's Pawn
etc..
Think about that. If you study how to deal with these formations then you will have more strategic resources. The tactical resources also, if the study is directed to the frequent attacks and tactics of these formations.
@LukaCro re public interest in chess, I think super GM rapid games when it's being analysed and commentated on by other GMs is a lot of fun. Less draws, interesting positions.
I would spend more effort getting the public interested in rapid than classical chess. Players might hold classical chess as more significant and important, but if the goal is to increase public interest they should focus on what the public want.
@nayf re depth and breadth, I got frustrated with chessable (it might have changed since I used it) because it would teach you depth first and then breadth. I'd spend days trying to memorise a line in an opening largely without understanding the reason behind the moves, and that line would never appear in a game.
I'd rather learn openings breadth first, then depth. This time also understanding and memorising the purpose of a move. I think that's the key I was missing before.
@will_is_myth Any free copies?
Lots of people with a lot of excuses to not do the hard work and learn their openings deeply :)
@BlakeyBChess I don't need an excuse for this. I play chess for fun and for me opening study did only get interesting, when I hit around 2000 FIDE. Before there were to seldom opponents knowing openings. So the three principles center, development, king security added with looking into the books after a game were sufficient.
Thank you, I enjoyed the video a lot. I have always been the kind of person you describe in your post, too worried about having to memorize all those opening lines.
But you do make it seem easy. I managed to memorize all three lines and repeat them all after watching the video just once.
If you could share your material, I would certainly be happy.
