While I can understand those people, who claim that system-style openings can be rather boring, they definitely have their place, especially for beginners.
I have had countless games against newer players in more sharp openings, such as the Ruy Lopey or the Sicilian, where the game was practically over after only a few moves, because of someone missing a common opening tactic. This can lead to much frustration, which can be avoided by playing such systems.
I have had countless games against newer players in more sharp openings, such as the Ruy Lopey or the Sicilian, where the game was practically over after only a few moves, because of someone missing a common opening tactic. This can lead to much frustration, which can be avoided by playing such systems.
Lazy about sequence ordering memorization maybe... It might be a taste about where one likes to do the hard thinking.
I am curious about the word "pseudo" system. (and system). The blog first paragraph, holds aspects that I can understand, but they may also be mitigated...
how much room is there? for an opening new or old, to be considered a system.. why did you mention the existence of pseudo system. What property, say from blog first paragraph, would have a weak showing for pseudo to apply (or other non-systems, to be partly systems too).
I realize this may be subjective. I am not expect a binary answer, but some subjective yet rational statements.. That is how words are best approached, before grabbing them and going our merry way as if they were definitions.
Thanks for showing systems that do not look at all like the first 5, for which i find core placement commonalities.. (it seems that only the job of the Queen B, varies between those, in correlation with lateral to center pawns "variations" (in placement). I need to read about the others, no experience with them at all...
I am curious about the word "pseudo" system. (and system). The blog first paragraph, holds aspects that I can understand, but they may also be mitigated...
how much room is there? for an opening new or old, to be considered a system.. why did you mention the existence of pseudo system. What property, say from blog first paragraph, would have a weak showing for pseudo to apply (or other non-systems, to be partly systems too).
I realize this may be subjective. I am not expect a binary answer, but some subjective yet rational statements.. That is how words are best approached, before grabbing them and going our merry way as if they were definitions.
Thanks for showing systems that do not look at all like the first 5, for which i find core placement commonalities.. (it seems that only the job of the Queen B, varies between those, in correlation with lateral to center pawns "variations" (in placement). I need to read about the others, no experience with them at all...
I read the conclusion, and I liked the concern for relatively recent psychology studies applied to the player development.
I specially appreciated the notion of "territory" being explored (or not) in some sense of diversity. That one can become good in one, and possibly not in some other. Position experience is not just a blob.
I specially appreciated the notion of "territory" being explored (or not) in some sense of diversity. That one can become good in one, and possibly not in some other. Position experience is not just a blob.
And i finally looked at the blog image... twice.... first i noticed it was not from a game... went to sleep... (i usually don't really look at the images, thinking they are there as colorful peripheral uplifting mood ingredient (taken from public stock).
Then i looked again... the bishops are actually telling the same story.... for the first 5.... (if i can count right, not always).
Nice introduction image! crafted.
Then i looked again... the bishops are actually telling the same story.... for the first 5.... (if i can count right, not always).
Nice introduction image! crafted.
very Nice!