is it true, that by studying endgames; you will progress farther than studying openings and midgames
Yes, u will become a GM in 3 weeks...
A balanced approach is much more helpful. Its easy to get into the “opening variations circus” I did. But over time I’ve learned basic opening theory is a much better approach. Tactics and basic endgames and opening theory to the point it get you a playable game. Knowing what a super GM does on move 24 of the Sicilian is not helpful to most of us. I had a senior master tell me I’d know when deeper opening knowledge was necessary. Time best spent on tactics, basic endgame knowledge and obtaining playable opening position’s in a couple openings I like to play.
@filthiesteote said in #1:
> help!!!!!!!!
see you need to balacne everything, if you dont know how to play openings and middlegame then you wont be able to even reach till middlegame, Thats why its important to keep balance
> help!!!!!!!!
see you need to balacne everything, if you dont know how to play openings and middlegame then you wont be able to even reach till middlegame, Thats why its important to keep balance
Studying the endgames is easy, just study middlegame.
The final depends on the middle of the game which depends on the opening....
I have read Dvoretzky‘s manual AND FCE (I don’t know anyone before) which took me several years: in short, I don’t think so.
You can study the different phases of the game differently.
For openings, you can learn principles, you can learn ideas, or you can learn variations by heart.
For middlegames, you most likely learn plans.
For the endgame, you learn basic skills, like checkmating with king and rook against the king, how to play king and pawn vs king, etc. Then there are principles and techniques.
At each level, there is something you can do in all phases. If you don't know how to checkmate with king and queen, well, there is really no point in gaining a material advantage.
If you know how to evaluate (and ideally play) certain types of endgames, you know what you have to aim for (or avoid) in the middlegame. But in order to get a somewhat reasonable middle- and then endgame, some kind of knowledge of opening principles is certainly extremely helpful.
Usually, simply learning opening variations (even deep) will be pretty useless at the board, because usually the opponent plays something different. And many players just play as if it were the same position they learned, which is just stupid.
Endgame knowledge seems much more useful universally. Just don't overdo it at the cost of neglecting everything else.
Another point to consider: you can probably recover from mistakes in the opening and middlegame. A mistake in the endgame is often beyond repair.
For openings, you can learn principles, you can learn ideas, or you can learn variations by heart.
For middlegames, you most likely learn plans.
For the endgame, you learn basic skills, like checkmating with king and rook against the king, how to play king and pawn vs king, etc. Then there are principles and techniques.
At each level, there is something you can do in all phases. If you don't know how to checkmate with king and queen, well, there is really no point in gaining a material advantage.
If you know how to evaluate (and ideally play) certain types of endgames, you know what you have to aim for (or avoid) in the middlegame. But in order to get a somewhat reasonable middle- and then endgame, some kind of knowledge of opening principles is certainly extremely helpful.
Usually, simply learning opening variations (even deep) will be pretty useless at the board, because usually the opponent plays something different. And many players just play as if it were the same position they learned, which is just stupid.
Endgame knowledge seems much more useful universally. Just don't overdo it at the cost of neglecting everything else.
Another point to consider: you can probably recover from mistakes in the opening and middlegame. A mistake in the endgame is often beyond repair.
I support the need for people to learn endgames. Quite often, I get in trouble against good opponents, but then I get a draw because they don't know simple rook and king, and queen and king, endings. There are also times when I pull off a win when a pawn or two down, merely because I have a basic idea of how to conduct end-games. To my mind, the relevant part of Capablanca's Chess Fundamentals would suffice.
@filthiesteote Well I could name a couple of Chess Books to read Capablanca's Best Chess Endings in 60 Complete Games ... by Irving Chernev ... Complete Games are the Key to learning with Notes . The second book I will not name until you finish the First Book but in the future some Chess Books need not be read all the way through' . 60 Games can be 3 Games a Day for 20 days or 4 games a Day in 15 days . It's up to You if the 15 days go by & You didn't do anything about it ask yourself why ?