Just emailed Raul about the 1.d4 opening reportoire from Year 1

Not sure how the rest of you felt about the openings module but I felt the 1.d4 reportoire was incomplete.

I really enjoyed Month 11 where they provided game examples and models games for the Indian Defences and Catalan but I hated the material in months 12 and 13. To me it was just a database dump of material I didn't understand, i.e the Gligoric variation in the KID and an line against the Nimzo, even though our reportoire doesn't allow for the Nimzo.

I would have much preferred more game examples and model games for the rest of the lines in our original reportoire, i.e the Slav, QGA, Budapest, Tarrasch and the remaining lines. That would have made sense and rounded out the openings module nicely imo.

I also felt there should be some lines against 1.d4 d6 and 1.d4 e6 especially when followed with 1.d4 e6 2. c4 f5! when we go into a Dutch in which our 2.Nc3 reportoire is useless.

Anyway I have emailed Raul about this and will tell you what he says. If anyone else feels the same way I think it would be great if you also emailed as the 1.d4 reportoire is just incomplete to me as it stands, and could be so much improved with just a little work.

I hope they don't mind constructive feedback. I guess that as their course is still literally a work in progress they would probably welcome it?

Well that was a quick response! This is what Raul said, good news, they are planning to update!

Thank you very much for your feedback.

We really thought that the new lines prepared in the last months of our
course are very useful/interesting as they are main lines and very seriously
analyzed... but maybe for a level that our students are not interested in
yet. We also thought that comments are no more important at this stage but
now, after some feedbacks, we know that's far from true. I just want to let
you know that all that work asked MUCH MORE effort from us than the previous
approach.

The update of the last months of the Openings Module are one of our first
priorities now. We are also working to other improvements for the first
year. Different move orders is also considered.
Although I do not know yet an estimate for Months 12-13 update, I think the
first lessons will be published in about 1 month from now.


Best regards,
Raul Neagos



Nice to see they are still working to improve the openings module in addition to working the 2nd year!

I love these guys! Thanks for the update Bilbo.

Sounds good... and now I think I am glad that I've decided to focus on the main content and leave the openings till afterwards.

I have a 4 year study planned. First year is the main content. Second year is the openings. Third year is to repeat the first year. Fourth year is to study endgames.

It looks as a good plan for me, jdut keep studying other things as well during the process, i'd like to know the results of your plan until now, thanks.
Also i'm glad to tell you that they're planning to add petroff and philidor defenses to the e4 repertorie

I've only completed year one and have kinda fallen off the rails -- I hate studying openings. Now I am going through Silmans "Reassess Your Chess, 4th Edition". So far I am growing with positional understanding, but my tactics are suffering...

I think they have some pretty good advice on their website http://www.chessarea.com/chess-instructions/

I really haven't followed their guidance with regard to playing time so as a result my OTB performance is poor since I enter into competitions rarely and show up rusty.

At the same time I play correspondence chess and have a good record into the master levels. At the end of the ICS first year I think I can now evaluate positions quite well, even to the level where I have a good feel as to when computer engines are giving sub-optimal moves.

I'd suggest that if someone is going to play correspondence they need to study the openings since any small inaccuracy will lose, however, for OTB performance one can get by with strong positional and calculation skills and practice, practice practice....

[ think they have some pretty good advice on their website http://www.chessarea.com/chess-instructions/

I really haven't followed their guidance with regard to playing time so as a result my OTB performance is poor since I enter into competitions rarely and show up rusty.

At the same time I play correspondence chess and have a good record into the master levels. At the end of the ICS first year I think I can now evaluate positions quite well, even to the level where I have a good feel as to when computer engines are giving sub-optimal moves.

I'd suggest that if someone is going to play correspondence they need to study the openings since any small inaccuracy will lose, however, for OTB performance one can get by with strong positional and calculation skills and practice, practice practice....]

jajajaja yes i saw your same response in other topic jajaja, chess i think it's pretty good advice too

[I've only completed year one and have kinda fallen off the rails -- I hate studying openings. Now I am going through Silmans "Reassess Your Chess, 4th Edition". So far I am growing with positional understanding, but my tactics are suffering...]

I'm sorry yo hear that, but at least i see that you are having good improvements with your positional understanding

supermoy wrote:
jajajaja yes i saw your same response in other topic jajaja,

Hmmm... My wife says I'm starting to repeat myself too!

Just found this some days ago, they seems to recommand 1.d4 also as a starter.
http://anonym.to/?http://www.expert-chess-strategies.com/learn-chess-openings-fast.html

I have no idea what this page worth, but reading it in diagonal, it appears not to be completely dumb, there are indeed some interesting ideas for patzers like borg and me who are reluctant at learning openings variations...

Is there any overlap with ICS guidance ?

HangingKing wrote:
Is there any overlap with ICS guidance ?

I don't think so.

ICS provides a comprehensive repertoire structured to be sufficient for play at the master level. The short cut promises at the link you provided are a diversion from that goal in imho.

If it's memorizing the tabyia's that you find boring here's a suggestion that I've adoped with the year two stuff you might find more apealing. Since each month is structured around a specific opening system you can import the games into your playing software as an opening book for practice. Then, play some blitz games. You can then analyze your games with the help of those twelve "model" games (plus the videos). Clearly these games are not comprehensive in terms of a complete playing repertoire, but I think at the end of the 2nd year you will have a pretty good foundation for selecting a system for concentrated opening preparation.

Ohh that sounds great, can anyone among you tell me about the second and third year, since i 'm just starting the second year and i want to know more about it in the samen way that i saw many good opinions about the first year thanks

There's a description in the Year 2 thread. Basically all annotated games (12) and video (on a monthly opening theme). I'm about half through Year 2, has anyone started Year 3?

ohh, how about your experience at year 2?, and compared to the first?, do you think you'll learn?, amm and yes exactly i was wondering if somebody could answer those questions but also about year 3

The material is great, but I find it much more difficult than the first year.

Since it is all annotated games and not structured around my (the ICS) opening repertoire I have to fight to stay focused - I especially miss the exercises and quizzes found in year one. This is why I adoped the strategy of playing some blitz games with the openings of the monthly theme.