I think they have finished it!!!!

I couldn't log on today & noticed that that was because they have changed the layout of introductory page but especially in the openings. It looks much better coordinated than the previous ( incomplete?) version. Looks also like a few tweaks to main course on the way. Maybe we are being the guinea pigs for this course but I'd rather be there at the beginning than waiting for perfection.

It looks like they made some excellent changes. Awesome.

first i take the opening module for two things:1-the najdorf as black that i use in otb games with not to bad result,but wanting to go deeper...they replace it with the kalashnikov things,2-the nimzo...i was excited to play this opening because i need a good response against d4 and after read some comments on nimzo-indian i thought that this openings fit with my style of play...they replace it the semi-slave..an opening that i tried in the past and not like it.[list=1][*]i think they (ics) favor d4 players a lot,just look at the program month 11-13.. 3 month with nothing to do with e4...and when they write in the program about the opening module (WE ALSO MADE A E4 REPERTOIRE FOR THOSE PLAYERS WHO CANNOT PUT THE FINGERS ON OTHER PIECE THAN THIS PAWN)WHAT THE@@££¤¬¦²!!!whats there problem with e4? the memorize thing?maybe if we were 98 years old men i ll understand but its not the case here..i payed cause i thougt it was at least fifty fifty with d4 and e4 but its just crap. the main course is really good but defenitely the opening course its a waste of money,buy a good book or two and yours in business!! sorry for my frenchglish!

A lot of valid points.

I mentioned earlier that I took the course to play the openings that "the good players play". In this regard I feel I have been let down.

On the other hand I think the opening course is better coordinated but does not seem to be an opening repertoire consistent with the 2300 player we "could" become at the end.

I have started so will probably continue with it. But I would not have taken it had I known for the reasons given by awake

The openings are still GM level openings, just less sharp.

It is true they are biased toward d4, which is one reason I've switched to d4. Might as well get all the ICS opening instruction possible!

In case anyone hasn't seen their new pdf page outlining the new openings and variations its here

http://www.chessmasterschool.com/clients/mainfiles/program-openings.pdf

Raul responded to my email a moment ago. Probably not very respectful if I print his reply here but basically he said that they never started the Nimzo Indian reportiore it was just an intention but they canned it, along with the Najdorf because they were too huge to learn for the average player in the allotted time.

I had asked if there was going to be general instruction and theory related to opening play and he said that the same themes in the main module applied, "center", "King Safety" "Development" "Piece Harmony etc"

In response to my saying the opening course had been so confusing he said he didn't know what to say other than he believed there were no better annotations to be found than on this course.

I havn't actually worked through them yet so can't comment on that claim.


I'm not sure what to do really, their coverage as it stands doesn't seem to be as in depth and as easy to understand as say John Nunns Mastering the Chess Openings and Mihail Marin's excelllent Beating the Open Games and the Spanish Reportoire for Black.

I'm a d4 player so could probably get a fair bit of mileage from that reportoire. I don't play the Catalan but I'm sure it would be helpful to add in time so I would probably make use of that entire reportoire over the next two or three years.

I don't play 1.e4 but I intend to dabble with it initially against players who I know will respond with e5 so I can to play the Ruy Lopez with both sides, I believe that is the most instructive opening of all to learn from a straetgic and positional standpoint. I'm sure I'd experiement a bit against other lines in a year or so as well once I've familiarised myself with 1.d4.

The reportoires for black however are more troublesome. I am an 1.e5 player and can't see me switching to the Sicilian as its too sharp for my tastes. The Scandinavian appeals as its slightly offbeat, easy to learn and solid. I can see myself using that to try and draw against stronger players than me when I want to avoide their Lopez, Scotch etc.

The French is probably up my street but I've always been put off by Steinitzs famous quote namely 'I have never played the French, which is the dullest of all openings'

Against 1.d4 I'm not sure I'd use the Dutch, either variation ever. I'm a queens gambit player and so could probably transition to the Slav and make use of that but the Dutch Stonewell doens't appeal to me really at all, although it might in the future I guess.

I'm most gutted about the Nimzo Indian, this was the opening I fancied to progressing to a year or so from now once I had honed my Queens Gambit Declined skills to an acceptable level, I believed this represented the most reliable and principled defense for black against 1.d4.

So in short, I will get good value from 1.d4, some value from 1.e4, am happy to learn the Scandinavian and will probably incorporate the Slav, but the rest I'm not sure I will ever play.

So almost half the course will be of little to no use to me.

I'm also disappointed that there are only a few annotated games and not until month 9 but to be fair I guess we are supposed to find our own games, and its not as if I lack for chess books so will be able to build my own collection of model games, which is perhaps what I'm supposed to do.

I still don't feel great about the opening course but I will continue. They have at least now provided opening lines against pretty much every black try against 1.d4 and probably 1.e4 too and the reportoire is nicely chosen in that most of the lines are solid and well respected but the most common continuations which will mean that we will likely have a big advantage in theoretical knowledge against our opponents.

The quality of their main module is so good that I will trust that they will deliver over the course of the year and we will indeed have an excellent, complete and solid opening reportoire within a year or so.

I find their annotations extremely good.

"I don't play 1.e4 but I intend to dabble with it initially against players who I know will respond with e5 so I can to play the Ruy Lopez with both sides, I believe that is the most instructive opening of all to learn from a straetgic and positional standpoint. I'm sure I'd experiement a bit against other lines in a year or so as well once I've familiarised myself with 1.d4."

Do not forget earlier black's deviations : Petroff, Philidor, Latvian/Elephant Gambits, etc.

Strad wrote:Do not forget earlier black's deviations : Petroff, Philidor, Latvian/Elephant Gambits, etc.

And welcome to why I am happy to be playing 1 d4.

The only reasons I stopped playing e4 is that I don't want to learn heaps of stuff to counter the Sicilian and I just hate to play the Ruy Lopez..frankly I'd rather watch golf in slow motion than play Ruy Lopez from either side ! I find it more dull than any other opening against e4. Anyway, most mentors and coaches recommend 'e4' to beginners and intermediate players anyway. So I am not sure 'what' kind of players are they targeting at, in this opening module; if they will only provide 'd4' based openings...

KasparovIsGod wrote:I just hate to play the Ruy Lopez..frankly I'd rather watch golf in slow motion than play Ruy Lopez from either side ! I find it more dull than any other opening against e4....

As a long time Ruy Lopez devoted (both sides) i disagree with you.
do you really consider the Open variation,the feared Marshall gambit, zaitsev, chigorin, breyer, etc...dull variations?
The Ruy Lopez is very strategical opening with a tense fight for control in the center, and from my view the most appealing for meeting 1 e4.
i guess you like Kasparov. He is afraid of the Marshall and turned to others anti-marshall lines and also don't forget Kramnik beat him with the berlin.
it is ok you do not like it but asserting is dull is a very different thing...

An opening book costs between 15 to 30 dollars, and you're going to get something completely different than what you get here. So in a way we're comparing apples and bananas.
I'm sticking with the openings module, not to get a complete repertoire, because I don't think such a thing really exists. But as a beginner I'm interested in their method applied to openings that I don't know very well anyway. I figure it's a good start to years of study.

cofresi wrote:An opening book costs between 15 to 30 dollars, and you're going to get something completely different than what you get here. So in a way we're comparing apples and bananas.
I'm sticking with the openings module, not to get a complete repertoire, because I don't think such a thing really exists. But as a beginner I'm interested in their method applied to openings that I don't know very well anyway. I figure it's a good start to years of study.

in a books,with a specifics opening you go deeper and they teach you the idea behind the opening move,i thought that ics opening repertoire could have done this,but they write few commentary and a lotttttttttttt of variation,i already have fritz dont need ics for that,so for the variation just buy the eco,for 30 bucks or so and you save 165$ and after that buy 1 or two books on generals opening and thats it! but i maintain that the main course of ics is really good!

Don't get the ICS for variation trees. The whole point of what makes their opening stuff good is the consequences and to do lists. I find they do this as well as the best books, and better than most books. For instance, look at their treatment of King's Indian Defenses to 1. d4. It is a gorgeous work.

Blue Devil Knight wrote:Don't get the ICS for variation trees. The whole point of what makes their opening stuff good is the consequences and to do lists. I find they do this as well as the best books, and better than most books. For instance, look at their treatment of King's Indian Defenses to 1. d4. It is a gorgeous work.

as i already said,you:right about the d4 opening they put a lot of work into it, i look at the king indian defence and it s very good,but you know that with the e4 opening its another story,but anyway i ll focus with the main course and maybe they will impress me with the lopez!and for the general opening books the best i read so far is MASTERING THE CHESS OPENING from john watson,excellent books for d4 and e4 (on two volume)have a nice day!

Strad: hey if Steinitz can call French a dull opening..I think I can call Ruy Lopez a dull opening as well.(not that I need his precedence). I am perfectly aware of all the variants of Ruy Lopez from Marshall to Moeller, but I find it to be boring cuz you can't force the issue with white or black and have to rely on long ...long... term planning that 'might' give you an edge, and you won't win unless your opponent makes a major mistake. As a matter of fact I like Kasparov but I also like Kramnik equally, and yet I find Ruy Lopez boring! *shrugs* It's a matter of taste I suppose. Some players are die-hard fans of BDG or Evan's gambit and no matter how many times they lose in it, they will swear by it. I myself don't play the Sicilian against e4..but I find it immensely appealing and stronger than any other opening against e4.
p.s. Btw if you think Kasparov was ever afraid of Ruy Lopez, you should see his games where he dismantled Karpov, Adams, Ulf Andersson, Anand etc. in Ruy Lopez, not to mention he has also beaten Kramnik's Berlin variant after the 2000 WCC match.

awake wrote:as i already said,you:right about the d4 opening they put a lot of work into it, i look at the king indian defence and it s very good,but you know that with the e4 opening its another story,but anyway i ll focus with the main course and maybe they will impress me with the lopez!and for the general opening books the best i read so far is MASTERING THE CHESS OPENING from john watson,excellent books for d4 and e4 (on two volume)have a nice day!

Their stuff on the Ruy also looked good, with good to do lists, consequences. Not a full repertoire, though, but just the main lines. Clearly all their stuff needs to be supplemented with a database/repertoire book.

Watson I found to be a long walk for a short drink of water. That dude likes to use a lot of words to describe simple things.

One thing is for sure, the sure way to pull a lurking chess player into a discussion is to express an opinion on an opening! Chess yentas unite!

KasparovIsGod wrote:Strad: hey if Steinitz can call French a dull opening..I think I can call Ruy Lopez a dull opening as well.(not that I need his precedence). I am perfectly aware of all the variants of Ruy Lopez from Marshall to Moeller, but I find it to be boring cuz you can't force the issue with white or black and have to rely on long ...long... term planning that 'might' give you an edge, and you won't win unless your opponent makes a major mistake. As a matter of fact I like Kasparov but I also like Kramnik equally, and yet I find Ruy Lopez boring! *shrugs* It's a matter of taste I suppose. Some players are die-hard fans of BDG or Evan's gambit and no matter how many times they lose in it, they will swear by it. I myself don't play the Sicilian against e4..but I find it immensely appealing and stronger than any other opening against e4.
p.s. Btw if you think Kasparov was ever afraid of Ruy Lopez, you should see his games where he dismantled Karpov, Adams, Ulf Andersson, Anand etc. in Ruy Lopez, not to mention he has also beaten Kramnik's Berlin variant after the 2000 WCC match.

i don't get your idea about "dull" openings, as far as i know there is no opening can give you a clear advantage for granted, just "slightly better" for white or "equal" for black, i'm afraid that "force the issue" thing just will take you to unsound openings/gambits. Yeah, surely Kasparov won many games with the Ruy for me is just another proof that the best dynamic player ever do not regard the Ruy as "dull" Let's agree to disagree and move on to a more constructive thread (and also because my english is not good enough for such complex arguments...lol). By the way what do you play against 1 e4? just curious

BDK: hehehe you are right..it's like politics and religion..one comment against their view and out they come in hordes! lol ...Strad: I just dont like blockades..that's all.. it's like two elephants pushing each other without breaking contact..not much skill needed just lot of patience and eventually fatigue wins over! (or causes the loss..) :p

Long walk for a short drink, two elephants pushing each other, I'm loving the analagies in this thread

Blue Devil Knight wrote:One thing is for sure, the sure way to pull a lurking chess player into a discussion is to express an opinion on an opening! Chess yentas unite!

This is rude. i would like to remind you that i'm not english speaker and posting here takes a great effort, but i try to participate when i'm really interested in a subject. Let's try to post in a Spanish forum yourself http://www.ajedrecista.com/foros/index.php?showtopic=6169.
I'm here because i'm interested on improving ideas but this forum is becoming full of stupid stuff

I'm not sure which word you think is not english -
'yentas' is in the Random House Dictionary, and in fact is related to the Spanish 'gente' and 'gentil'.

So you should not have a problem with it.
Si no te gusta aquí, quédate allá.

cofresi wrote:I'm not sure which word you think is not english -
'yentas' is in the Random House Dictionary, and in fact is related to the Spanish 'gente' and 'gentil'.

So you should not have a problem with it.
Si no te gusta aquí, quédate allá.

quieres discutir en español..mucho mejor esfuerzate y traduce como yo lo hago. Y para que entiendas mejor no me senti ofendido por la ultima expression sino por tratarme como un jugador "escondido" para la proxima asegurate bien de entender antes de intervenir

Looked it up in a dictionary:

Yenta

From Jewish background which means a woman who talks too much and never shuts up. Can be used as Yentering also.

Ex. Your girl is such a Yenta. So your girl and her friends are Yentering at Starbucks.

I don't think it's that bad of a curse. I don't think BDK was trying to insult anybody!