I wanted to explore the Colle system as one early system, and I was surprised to see it being very far down in optimized behavior according to the opening explorer in (correspondance games), mostly masters, but also lichess. The c4 is dominating all avenues as white move. so I had to really want it. It was interesting to see history that way (at its end). I really had to explore that geometry.
An obvious example of someone who used to rehabilitate old openings constantly was Bent Larsen.
@Frogster64 said in #10:
> In my opinion, it would totally work in blitz/rapid against 2000-Lichess rated or less players. We are NOT good at openings. For example, play the old 4 knights opening with White, get really well versed in it and challenge your opponent to refute it. Sometimes, he'll get easy equality, so you try to beat him in the middle game in positions you're familiar with; but a lot of times you'll find a way to keep an edge. Nothing suicidal here. Playing lesser-known lines is the smart thing to do.
>
> I just mentioned the 4-knights as an example because I was watching 2 GMs play it over and over in bullet. The games definitely got tricky quickly, which I would not have expected from this opening.
4 knights its actually my main opening, lol i can say 80% of players i've faced they dont follow the main lines and i have many wins with it
> In my opinion, it would totally work in blitz/rapid against 2000-Lichess rated or less players. We are NOT good at openings. For example, play the old 4 knights opening with White, get really well versed in it and challenge your opponent to refute it. Sometimes, he'll get easy equality, so you try to beat him in the middle game in positions you're familiar with; but a lot of times you'll find a way to keep an edge. Nothing suicidal here. Playing lesser-known lines is the smart thing to do.
>
> I just mentioned the 4-knights as an example because I was watching 2 GMs play it over and over in bullet. The games definitely got tricky quickly, which I would not have expected from this opening.
4 knights its actually my main opening, lol i can say 80% of players i've faced they dont follow the main lines and i have many wins with it
brain impairment as source of creativity (or winning odds?). i view time control as voluntary disability.
@MrPushwood said in #12:
> An obvious example of someone who used to rehabilitate old openings constantly was Bent Larsen.
He did it for chess psychology.
> An obvious example of someone who used to rehabilitate old openings constantly was Bent Larsen.
He did it for chess psychology.
Any opening will be a forced draw with best play. Around move 12-14 they begin to have to think for themselves and that's when the errors begin. Endgames are so precise someone is bound to mess up, plus a strong tactician can complicate matters.
Openings are the most dangerous part of the game, which is why people are so obsessed with it. Performance in any chess tournament is usually determined solely by the openings which happen to be played. Until we move to a variant with no theory that will not change.
Openings are the most dangerous part of the game, which is why people are so obsessed with it. Performance in any chess tournament is usually determined solely by the openings which happen to be played. Until we move to a variant with no theory that will not change.
I played this entire game against a 1700ish USCF rated player last week.
www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1710371
www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1710371
@I_invented_google said in #15:
> He did it for chess psychology.
What the heck is that supposed to mean?
> He did it for chess psychology.
What the heck is that supposed to mean?
Fischer also learned Russian just so he could keep up with the latest ideas.
@MrPushwood said in #18:
> What the heck is that supposed to mean?
Read "Winning with Chess Psychology" by Pal Benko.
Great book.
> What the heck is that supposed to mean?
Read "Winning with Chess Psychology" by Pal Benko.
Great book.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.