- Blind mode tutorial
lichess.org
Donate

A radical opening experiment: The results

#2

I know you were playing the Caro, so I'm very surprised your e5 and c5 games go well. I got annoyed with a lot of lines in the Caro myself, and looked to switch openings. I really like attacking games with White, and as tactical as possible with Black. I was often able to get those in Caro, but not always (mainly Short Variation, 2 knights, Endgame offer, Breyer and KIA).

My score in the Caro for refrence is 49-43%

My first thought was the Sicilian (38-49%), where I played over 100 games now, and while my score wasn't great in the open sicilian, I dodn't worry about that, as one I didn't yet chose my main Sicilian. What I didn't like are the sidelines. Alapin, 2. c4, and every single one closed sicilian.

I knew e4 e5 games were long, theoretical, stragetical, and easy to go wrong in, so I avoided it at first. Finally I decided to give it a try, and I went 1-6 (being lost in my only won game aswell). It went exactly as I expected lol

I also avoided the French (47-42%) for the same reason I likely won't ever play the Slav - the Exchange. But as a Caro players, the games were pretty fun there, and even with no theory I found the positions very familiar.

And that is all objectively good responses. But I decided to give one more opening a try, similar to the french and caro, so I'll feel comfortable there, while giving massive attacking chances - the Scandi.

I experiemented with puting the knight on c6 and castling long quickly, and it generally didn't go well, but somehow my score in the Scandi is best with 49-41% And excluding games I lost in the tennison gambit, it jumps up to 51-37% which is insane. I definitely found my opening. In the meantime I completed my repertoire against d4 with me being happy against almost every possible White's move (I'm yet to learn the Bg5 stuff).

I'm excited to try it out in a classical tournament, since I don't think there is really any opening I'm unhappy to face. Maybe some lines in Nimzo-Larsen, and some sidelines in the English, with d3, e3 or a3, where I'll have to look for something aggresive.

TL;DR an opening experiement is a must try if you have improved a lot, since choosing your openings. your opponents changed drastically, and what worked then might not work now that well, but there are other things out there that will work for you to find them.

I know you were playing the Caro, so I'm very surprised your e5 and c5 games go well. I got annoyed with a lot of lines in the Caro myself, and looked to switch openings. I really like attacking games with White, and as tactical as possible with Black. I was often able to get those in Caro, but not always (mainly Short Variation, 2 knights, Endgame offer, Breyer and KIA). My score in the Caro for refrence is 49-43% My first thought was the Sicilian (38-49%), where I played over 100 games now, and while my score wasn't great in the open sicilian, I dodn't worry about that, as one I didn't yet chose my main Sicilian. What I didn't like are the sidelines. Alapin, 2. c4, and every single one closed sicilian. I knew e4 e5 games were long, theoretical, stragetical, and easy to go wrong in, so I avoided it at first. Finally I decided to give it a try, and I went 1-6 (being lost in my only won game aswell). It went exactly as I expected lol I also avoided the French (47-42%) for the same reason I likely won't ever play the Slav - the Exchange. But as a Caro players, the games were pretty fun there, and even with no theory I found the positions very familiar. And that is all objectively good responses. But I decided to give one more opening a try, similar to the french and caro, so I'll feel comfortable there, while giving massive attacking chances - the Scandi. I experiemented with puting the knight on c6 and castling long quickly, and it generally didn't go well, but somehow my score in the Scandi is best with 49-41% And excluding games I lost in the tennison gambit, it jumps up to 51-37% which is insane. I definitely found my opening. In the meantime I completed my repertoire against d4 with me being happy against almost every possible White's move (I'm yet to learn the Bg5 stuff). I'm excited to try it out in a classical tournament, since I don't think there is really any opening I'm unhappy to face. Maybe some lines in Nimzo-Larsen, and some sidelines in the English, with d3, e3 or a3, where I'll have to look for something aggresive. TL;DR an opening experiement is a must try if you have improved a lot, since choosing your openings. your opponents changed drastically, and what worked then might not work now that well, but there are other things out there that will work for you to find them.
#3

In my experience, when I play something unfamiliar in online blitz, my brain gets out from autopilot, and I actually start to think, and because of this my play quality goes up. I think OTB classical the results would favor your opponents (experience matters a lot), but I might be wrong

In my experience, when I play something unfamiliar in online blitz, my brain gets out from autopilot, and I actually start to think, and because of this my play quality goes up. I think OTB classical the results would favor your opponents (experience matters a lot), but I might be wrong
#4

@rio2018 said in #3:

I think OTB classical the results would favor your opponents (experience matters a lot), but I might be wrong
depends what level. fide isnt the greatest way to judge that, as if you dont play internationally, its just reflects national rating basically, but its the only thing we have.

so for U1800 it doesnt matter what you play, middlegame and endgame are most important. ofc, good prep will grant you much better positions than no prep, but they wont be able to punish no prep

then the higher you go, the higher the prep relevancy, my guess is around 2050 fide is when you cant just freestyle openings, where need more than general knowledge, and 6 move lines, but i havent played enough players at that level to verify that.

all i can tell you, at some point there is a big jump in opening/early middlegame quality i think around 2000-2100 fide, and thats when you will frequently get punished for bad openings/little knowledge of them

@rio2018 said in #3: > I think OTB classical the results would favor your opponents (experience matters a lot), but I might be wrong depends what level. fide isnt the greatest way to judge that, as if you dont play internationally, its just reflects national rating basically, but its the only thing we have. so for U1800 it doesnt matter what you play, middlegame and endgame are most important. ofc, good prep will grant you much better positions than no prep, but they wont be able to punish no prep then the higher you go, the higher the prep relevancy, my guess is around 2050 fide is when you cant just freestyle openings, where need more than general knowledge, and 6 move lines, but i havent played enough players at that level to verify that. all i can tell you, at some point there is a big jump in opening/early middlegame quality i think around 2000-2100 fide, and thats when you will frequently get punished for bad openings/little knowledge of them
#5

@CkickyCheck said in #4:

depends what level. fide isnt the greatest way to judge that, as if you dont play internationally, its just reflects national rating basically, but its the only thing we have.

so for U1800 it doesnt matter what you play, middlegame and endgame are most important. ofc, good prep will grant you much better positions than no prep, but they wont be able to punish no prep

then the higher you go, the higher the prep relevancy, my guess is around 2050 fide is when you cant just freestyle openings, where need more than general knowledge, and 6 move lines, but i havent played enough players at that level to verify that.

all i can tell you, at some point there is a big jump in opening/early middlegame quality i think around 2000-2100 fide, and thats when you will frequently get punished for bad openings/little knowledge of them
I felt that even before 1800 there was a lot of games where opponent did not understand the position, and I could basically win from the openings. Not because of the lines (that came around 2000 fide, so that should be a good guess, for the point where it matters) but because I understood the position better. Plans, pawn structures, pawnbreaks ect.

@CkickyCheck said in #4: > depends what level. fide isnt the greatest way to judge that, as if you dont play internationally, its just reflects national rating basically, but its the only thing we have. > > so for U1800 it doesnt matter what you play, middlegame and endgame are most important. ofc, good prep will grant you much better positions than no prep, but they wont be able to punish no prep > > then the higher you go, the higher the prep relevancy, my guess is around 2050 fide is when you cant just freestyle openings, where need more than general knowledge, and 6 move lines, but i havent played enough players at that level to verify that. > > all i can tell you, at some point there is a big jump in opening/early middlegame quality i think around 2000-2100 fide, and thats when you will frequently get punished for bad openings/little knowledge of them I felt that even before 1800 there was a lot of games where opponent did not understand the position, and I could basically win from the openings. Not because of the lines (that came around 2000 fide, so that should be a good guess, for the point where it matters) but because I understood the position better. Plans, pawn structures, pawnbreaks ect.
#6

scandi is good i play it in blitz

scandi is good i play it in blitz
#8

I will also say that a few years ago I created an alt account to play openings I never played in 3+2... and got to +/- 100 points my normal rating. 2200 lichess blitz at the time.

So yeah I can attest that your experiment is repeatable. You now have a sample size n=2 to confirm that openings don't matter at all.

I will also say that a few years ago I created an alt account to play openings I never played in 3+2... and got to +/- 100 points my normal rating. 2200 lichess blitz at the time. So yeah I can attest that your experiment is repeatable. You now have a sample size n=2 to confirm that openings don't matter at all.
#9

when would you say, trying to rewind back to your first exposure to chess and the things called openings, and along the way until now, that you could have tried such exploration, and why only now going there?

can you identify factors of the chess culture or your own experience trajectory that would have made it a bad short, medium, long, longer, longest term learning strategy? share your chess improvement pursuit motivations if you can or have had time to self-probe over the years?

are these ok questions?

when would you say, trying to rewind back to your first exposure to chess and the things called openings, and along the way until now, that you could have tried such exploration, and why only now going there? can you identify factors of the chess culture or your own experience trajectory that would have made it a bad short, medium, long, longer, longest term learning strategy? share your chess improvement pursuit motivations if you can or have had time to self-probe over the years? are these ok questions?