Have they changed recommended openings?

I thought it was Najdorf they were recommending against e4. Now looks like Kalashnikov. Has this changed? I was looking forward to Najdorf!!

You could still study Najdorf if you like and take ICS material for Kalashnikov.

Doesn't Najdorf require a lot more theory and work?

Yes you are right it does. I just wanted to see the size of the challenge!! Maybe I'm just mad.

hoopy wrote:I thought it was Najdorf they were recommending against e4. Now looks like Kalashnikov. Has this changed? I was looking forward to Najdorf!!

if you looking for help with the Najdorf. Pick up the Kasparov series "how to play the najdorf" I bought them last year and found them great. I should review them again. I keep forgetting soo much!

Chess? wrote:

hoopy wrote:I thought it was Najdorf they were recommending against e4. Now looks like Kalashnikov. Has this changed? I was looking forward to Najdorf!!

if you looking for help with the Najdorf. Pick up the Kasparov series "how to play the najdorf" I bought them last year and found them great. I should review them again. I keep forgetting soo much!

Iwas hoping not to spend much until the course was over.Also was the Nimzo on the earlier list for black? I took the opening course to develop amainstream repertoire!!

I've emailed them regarding this.

I would be very disappointed if they have removed the Najdorf and especially the Nimzo Indian.

To me these are surely the best defenses for Black against e4 and d4 respectively and I'm frankly baffled why they would drop them.

Two versions of the Dutch seems overkill especially if you don't plan on playing the Dutch and dropping the Najdorf to replace with the Kalashnikov after they have already given us the outline reportoire for the Najdorf is barmy.

I'm pleased they giving us the Scandanavian and Semi Slav openings at least, I think the Scandanavian will be great as a solid choice for occasional use maybe against a stronger player when you just want to avoid defeat and the Semi Slav is one of the most important in mainstream theory today.

But please bring back the Nimzo and Najdorf!

I feel for ya dude. At least they could make it available for those that were here and want it. Maybe they'll send you their material.

They change content here enough that it makes sense to download and save the PDFs, or at least print them out, before they change.

Yeah luckily I've saved everything prior so I've not lost any material. I would probably have never played the Sicilian (either line) but the Nimzo was a definite possibility.

To be honest though, if they would have said Slav at the beginning I would have been fine with that too, it's a very solid opening.

I was disappointed that they changed the openings. I already play the Nimzo and the Accelerated Dragon ala Lev Alburt et al. I was hoping to migrate to the Najdorf. I accept that these openings have a lot of theory. The Slavs are no picnic either and I have tried the French in the past and it can be heavy too. As for the Dutch and Scandinavian, they would not be my ideal choice as second string. Overall I am less satisfied with the Opening Module, but will probably stick with it. Having said that, the best thing I have ever read on the subject of openings is page 8 in the intro to the Semi-Slav.

I've not really used the opening module yet but I will continue to get it.

Did you not get the Najdorf material from a couple months back? They have basically already covered it along with the anti sicilian lines from Month 4 now updated so you can play the Najdorf if you want.

Looking at the opening course outline they are only offering one month on the Kalashnikov anyway so you have effectively got the complete Najdorf set up near enough if you joined before they changed the module.

I was looking forward to the Nimzo too but I guess the Slav is a fine alternative.

Not sure I'll play the French or Dutch but the Scandinavian definitely appeals to me as a suprise backup weapon, especially against stronger players when I want to avoid their theoretical knowledge after my usual 1.e5.

I'm not going to learn it for a few months at least though as I don't want to start wimping out on e5 when I face a tough opponent and am worried about all the possible opening lines I might face.

I don't want a second choice simple system to lead to timidity so for now I will stick to 1.e5 and let my opponent bring it.....

The Najdorf files are quite good, but they are only Intro. I note in the later stuff on the Scandinavian, QGA etc. they are including more full games. If you want to study the Scandinavian just look at the games of Tiviakov.

My biggest problem with the module is that I basically was already working to a reportoire of my own before I started. I play 1.e5 against 1.e4 and 1.d5 against 1.d4 going in for classical Queens Gambit Declined positions.

I feel the best way to learn chess from the outset is to study the great classical games Queens Gambit Declined (white and black), Ruy Lopez, Italian Game, Kings Gambit, Scotch etc (all as black).

So the ICS module basically offers nothing towards my current goals but I think that's best in the long term. I already have Mihal Marin's excellent Beating the Open Games and Beating the Spanish so don't need a reportore for 1.e5 and the Slav and Catalan will likely be great weapons in the future.

I'm going to start with learning their lines for the Slav as White, the Dutch, Albin, Budapest, Tarrash and Indian lines then maybe add the Catalan next year along with the Scandanavian to give me so extra choice.

I have received from ICS by email a copy of the Najdorf lines that had been prepared for chessbase. The comment was also that they had never prepared the Nimzo ( interesting that this is the line that was advertised).

I wondered did those that did the earlier adopters of ICS who did the Najdorf earlier in the course also receive recommendations for 'anti-najdorf' lines or were these also "to be prepared"?

I found an interesting link on recommended openings according to their efficiency statistics.

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/adam.bozon/stats.htm

I guess the summary is the most interesting part, but that let still a big bunch of moves to memorize.

I was going to take up the recommended dutch. Doesn't look too good now!!
Mind you its not my openings that are bad. Just my chess

hoopy wrote:I was going to take up the recommended dutch. Doesn't look too good now!!
Mind you its not my openings that are bad. Just my chess

Dutch is fine! Many top GMs played it and continue to play it. Botvinnik played it in the past and young Kramnik also played it. Plus, there are good books on the Dutch to supplement ICS material.

I'm studying it now and it looks like an interesting opening.

Beware also of the stats, a good opening can simply have bad stats because it is difficult to master. So lot of player may fall with it because they make mistake in the middlegame resulting of the position after the opening, or just because the opponent proposed a different line, despite with correct moves it could be great and crashing !

On the opposite some openings are easier to remember and do not lead to extreme complications if the opponent do a little variation, and thus the opening may have better stats (more draws).

I think the choice depends of you own style, but on the long term, with stronger players, you'll fit into the stats themselves.