Don't Memorize Moves! Understand your Openings | Road to 2000
Vložit
- čas přidán 26. 02. 2019
- Caleb Denby shows what can happen when one simply memorizes opening moves without knowing the theoretical ideas behind them. See Anand lose in six moves.
Follow along: lichess.org/study/RSchAaZE
2019.02.27
Alonso Zapata vs Viswanathan Anand, Biel-B (1988): C42 Petrov, Nimzovich attack
www.chessgames.com/perl/chessg...
Luke Ye (1900 URS) vs. Caleb Denby (2007 URS): B19 Caro-Kann, classical, Spassky variation
Denby vs. Ben Shoykhet (1900 URS): A40 Modern defence
I feel like i was watching a Dora the explora episode the way he was asking a question and getting no response lol
Agreed. So these St Louis lectures are well watched online and well made. But they could do with larger live audiences and with more knowledgeable audiences. It applies to most videos of this seen, but in this video it is particularly painful. There just seems to be one guy in the in the audience, and even as a patzer myself I think I would have given far better answers.
I was thinking Steve from Blue's Clues.
Ya. Great video but too much dead air.
Hah! That's funny.
You should see university lectures in Finland: it can be a real test for a visiting lecturer’s self esteem when they ask a question and get a dead silence from an audience. Even if everyone in the audience knows an answer.
Caleb: What move should black do
Me: Bf5
Caleb: What is not an option is the move that Anand played which is Bf5
Me: hmm... at least i think like a former world champion
Should have played BfF
Pf5 is another option I'm surprised Caleb didn't think of. While he may view Anand's move as a blunder, Anand may have simply been using the move as a decoy in plans for a potential sacrifice if the other player reacted differently. Caleb is sharp, but think his low-browing these types of ploys from world class players is simply a means to boost his own morale and standings among his constituents. I personally think pf5 could have been another risky ploy which may have payed off, but then again, I'm not Anand and neither is Caleb.
@@Rick-the-Swift but if you watch on, apparently Anand resigns on move 6 of that game. I think he just made an oopsie.
that said, I'm actually pretty confused why it is such a bad move. Caleb talks about the knight being pinned but black could just unpin and add a defender to the knight at once with Qe7. I think maybe the reason for Anand resigning may not be as simple as he makes it out to be.
@@loftyjones675Nd5 threatening to win a rook after winning tempo on queen. Queen must go back and knight is lost
Caleb Denby is, even at his young age, a great teacher; I can already tell. It's a combination of mastery of the material, and real, caring feel for what his students know and don't know, and a professorial handling of those awkward silences when students either have no idea what he's driving at or don't want to risk embarrassment by sticking their necks out. I love how Mr. Denby gently and patiently explains the thought process so nobody feels stupid, but at the same time is making it very clear that if you want to progress, make it your business to understand what's what; it's loaded with gentle admonition, exuding clear authority in everything he says. But above all, conveying deep concern that the students actually learn.
Anon Ymous What an appreciative comment! I agree.
Wow, I'm getting the exact opposite impression. It became pretty obvious early on that the class was not comfortable speaking up. Continuing to try and force them to respond doesn't help anyone learn, and it seems like he just keeps bludgeoning that speaking tactic because it's all he knows. Engaging with your audience is good because it builds rapport, but when you try and force that engagement, you're not building anything except the tension in the room.
Additionally, what I got from the title was more along the lines of "learn the whys of the openings so that if your opponent steps out of the opening, you know what to do." What we actually got was an analysis of a mid-game. And when he left an obvious fork along that imaginary line 30 minutes in (I caught it and I'm terrible at chess), then doubled down on denying that he could've blundered, well, that made me lose the rest of my respect for him.
@@michaeltorrisi7289 How do you know "the class" was not comfortable speaking up? You don't even see them, they have no microphones and there was a chat as well.
put a ring on it already
I’m on the road to 1000 :’(
Edit: Now on road to 1200.
I haven’t been playing constantly unfortunately, as I get burned out after a couple months. But I always come back like a half year later then play couple months again. Lmao, I’m a mess!
Right there with you bro!
Normal Guy what’s so funny?
ಠಿ_ಠ I’m beginner. I’m setting myself a realistic goal.
me too man :)
@@Punkledunk Sorry, Let me help you. I am 2210 I never tried to reach 1000 never think of goal. I just only think of getting better. If you want to exceed 1000 then first Improve your calculation(using tricks), Learn about material strategy (not much to learn), Basic Endgame and little bit opening(3 or 4 opening will do) . This will surely leads to 1400. Whenever make move be patient try calculating all variation.
Learn only practical tactics which are important in your game. You can learn this by playing with below 1400 rated player
Learned a lot from the two games, especially the questions challenging us to understand why a move, or moves, were made. Many thanks.
Well, if you learned allot you should see imediate results
Refreshing to see a super GM such as Anand blunder the opening like I do every other game. Apparently I'm in good company.
Caleb didn't explain why 6. .. Qe7 doesn't save the piece. It's 7. Nd5 .. (and then d3 as the black queen has to vacate the file)
Its because he read it in the chess informant but it was acctualy a set up Game and he just repeated it
@@tensor131 He did at the end
Was this a classical game? Mustve been a short game..
Man I've blundered mate in winning games. It sucks. But you get better when you lose rather than winning.
What had I learned in this episode
1) Study for opening ideas instead of theory
2) Know what your opponent plans are good for you to stop the plan become truth
3) Natural moves and theoretical moves do not always correct in every chess game
4) Before you start on middle game, make a plan during opening
5) Clear mind in every chess game make us clear chess winning path
Hope this comment helps you guys. Stay tuned.
Where do I do number 1?
@@pedrovieira4227 instead memorize opening steps, look up the idea behind the steps
@@true6790 as i said, theory is important but ideas are more important. If you only follow theory move order to play an opening without knowing the ideas and reasons for the move, after a long run in playing chess, you will be bored and feel meaningless to chess. Instead, knowing ideas can let u be more creative when u play chess and this is the reason why chess is so fun.
Hope this comment help you!
You almost feel bad for him. He looks heartbroken that the class continuously fails to answer his elementary questions.
Yes, especially when he asked the super basic question, if the game becomes positional or agressive when they castle in different directions and they said it just wrong :D
Exactly! They are so lucky to be able to go to this club. And yet when the lecturers try to engage them, giving them a chance to start a discussion an learn something, they just sit there. I'd be all over the opportunity.
People are shy and afraid of looking stupid
@@Ma1efcent I agree with you. Also he also admits often: that there are more possible lines. And thats also make the audience unsecure to find 'the best idea'.. because they (like me too) see lot of ways to play, but its possibly not the 'best idea'.. And so the result is: no one answers, because even if they found the best idea, they are NOT sure, wether its the best or not (and like you said correctly: no one wants to look stupid).
If he set up the whole thing different (like GM Ben Finegold) : 'there is only ONE move.. so whats the move ? ' (at least GM Finegold give this feeling in his lectures), than more people come out - because: they aren't to much afraid, to doesnt find the 'engine-move' , if there is only ONE best move.
But if there are a lot of good moves in a position, which would work fine, than its much more a question of taste , and as this boy is kind of a chess-autority, he can say at will 'no thats not soo good, there is a better move' ...
So its psychological difficult. I assume its because this boy has quiet less experience how to handle an audience. I am sure, he will do better by the years.
@@PygmalionFaciebat Maybe different people have different taste, for me I would be more happy to answer in this guys class where i thought that one of my offered moves might be likely to be an acceptable move rather than an incorrect answer to "what is the best move?"
Props for showing and examining your own loss as well! I feel a lot of CZcamsrs (and chess personalities specifically) don't show themselves losing enough! Losing and examining why you lost is one of the best ways to stop losing! More people should do this! :)
I really appreciate that pace of teaching. I want to see more from Mr. Denby.
Excellent video! Very informative, loved the pace. Clearly a very knowledgable player as well. Keep it up! :)
"Don't Memorize Moves! Understand your Openings"
Me: Okay, the pawns can move 1 OR 2 squares, that's my strat
With due respect man, your analysis and explanation are good without a doubt, but I came here to "Understand Openings" I wanted to learn the ideologies and strategies regarding the openings. I saw you analysing a game not telling the ideas behind it, by the way nice content I hope you make more videos on chess ideologies and strategies. I can't criticise you as I am a noob at chess but I want to understand the ideologies/strategies behind making moves.
.
The most 3 basic things I know are:-
1. Develop your pieces - Idea [ To activate the pieces into powerful positions]
2. Control the center - Idea [ Center control is important as that's the place where the pieces are super active and can do the most damage]
3. Castling - Idea [ King's safety is priority, if he gets attacked i.e checkmated then you lose]
.
I am a big anime and football fan, so I try to take ideas from them and apply it in chess.
The style of chess I want to play is "Counter Attacking Defensive one" like how Borussia Dortmund played under Jürgen Klopp. Pressure, pressure, pressure the opponent & then countering with speed. Can you suggest some openings that I should study for both white and black that have this Counter Attacking Defensive Style? I am open to suggestions and comments.
Today I came first in the low elo section in a local turnament, some fms and ims were there and I was litterally thrilled. Thank you for sharing your knowledge.
Caleb, as a novice player, I really appreciate your coherent teaching skills. I learn a lot from you and the pauses from nobody chipping in actually helped me to try to solve the puzzles before you gave the correct answers. The crowd seemed scared to say the wrong answer.
A very good question this kid asks is "What kind of a game is it if the kings are on the opposites sides of the board?" 7:45
Knowing the answer is important because if that situation arises players are better equipped to deal with the situation.
Another good question that no one could answer 6:10 but not knowing the answer to this question would cost you the game.
i feel like 30 percent of this video is waiting for someone to say something while he bounces.
This is extremely accurate.
i calculate more like 65% but i never was good at calculating
Lol lol lol
The assumption is the audience will try to figure out the rationale of the moves. You and I are both watching the video of the game and the long pauses seem unnecessary but this is a video of a live discussion where this very bright but humble youth gives his students the opportunity to suggest moves.
The length of the time to actually play the one of the games is greater than the time it took to go over both of them.
Chess is not like basketball. It's more like baseball where there is long periods of no activity. It's a thinking man's game.
@@jamesbell2682 baseball is just boring. Like football. Pretty much everything but basketball.
Caleb doing a really good job, i think he`s style of teaching is effective. keep up the good work
Great presentation. Clear voice and lucid progression
This guys is great!! I'm loving the long pauses actually it helps out a lot
Damn the live chat is way more accurate than the audience!
Axel Ehrenstrom social anxiety is crippling
@@ts4gv no, live chat connects you to the whole world or atleast different parts of world enabling more diversity of thoughts than just a few people from local crowd. Why always be pessimistic about social world even in an optimistic situation?
@@varmamahesh9725 i think they meant the live audience has social anxiety..
In-person audience is on the road to 1000 😂
Seus vídeos são excelentes Caleb !! Continue assim.
I never felt so bad at chess 😭, thanks a lot for this video. Really instructive.
I enjoyed that, even with your tactical mistakes! And you made the point well that it's important to know the plans and ideas that arise from particular openings so that you can select moves that are consistent with those plans.
The tactical mistakes ruined the lecture
I'm not sure how old this guy is, but his presentation skills are impressive for his apparent age
He is 22.
Excellent seminar. Thank you.
Study the middle game positions that come out of the game - one of the best lessons I have learned in my chess journey. 1600 rated now
Nice analysis, Caleb! As a beginner, I think I learned to think more about the "why are you moving there?" instead of memorizing moves.
I liked the questions. It was like a time to pause and think a bit. Great vid
Thanks Caleb - really enjoy your videos :)
Excellent presentation; thank you for sharing.
Im enjoying this series with this guy lol
Yeah, he's pretty good. Nice to see someone so young to use self-deprecating humor as well.
Yes, lol indeed
Outstanding bro.. Was my first lecture I've seen by you.... I'm kinda of a Yasser guy when it comes to S.L.C?C lectures, although I'm totally gonna be checking out more of your content...
Great instructional video. Thank you.
Great presentation. Thanks for your detailed explanations.
Too bad that the audience was not very responsive.
You did a great job. Thanks again!
These lessons are at the eactly level that my game is. Very nice, thanks.
I'm new to learning the finer points of chess and I learned alot from watching this. Hearing hi explain the reasoning behind the moves and the strategy involved was eye opening. I will be checking out the other videos in this channel for sure. Is there any other study material you guys can recommend? I've also been using the Chessmaster program.
There's a chess book called "Winning Chess" By Fred Reinfeld & Irving Chernev.
It has the major tactics in one book.
Also a book, "Chess Tactics, A-Z." By George Huczek. Hope those are of help.
Best of luck to you in your chess career.
"pawns dont go backwards" baaaaahahahahhahahahaa, love how the audio cut out and came back just in time to heard that. to funny.
is this gonna be a series? looking great!
Very well done Caleb! This was a superbly well crafted talk with excellent and compelling examples. The questions were completely appropriate and well selected for a "Road to 2000" lecture (if anything a little easy), I'm sorry you didn't get better participation. I'm in the 1800-2000 range and I think I learned some important points from this. Immediately after watching I went and trounced two 2000+ opponents in online standard games : ) Now I'm going to go and find anything else you've done!
I love this video.. Do more like them please
Well I don't feel so alone not knowing my openings as I should.
I had no idea even some former world champions struggle in the opening. 20 years ago I was given a provisional ratting of at most 1700. I can only imagine if I really studied chess openings how my skill level would improve.
Thank-you for the video
Two thumbs up 👍👍, Content worthy of your consideration and verifiable through your own due diligence. ✌😎
I felt like a dunce watching this video! It takes more than a notion to commit to a 50-min video, and I was going to watch passively. Yet, I did begin to play the game when he'd ask, "Any ideas?" Half the time I had none - and the times when I did have an idea, he always showed a better one!
This was a good session, and I think my favorite part was when Master Denby showed us a game that he lost. I appreciated the humility and wondered if his exposure to Yasser Seirawan was a tiny factor.
Nevertheless, I watched this through and it echoed what I heard GM Seirawan say in a previous video: "Chess is a battle of ideas...." Thank you for this offering.
3:35, am I correct that he didn’t explain it completely? because after Qe2, black has Qe7 removing the pin and defending the knight (allowing the knight to move after d3), but it fails because of Nd5, threatening Nc7 fork (if black moves Qe6 to protect the knight). If I’m not mistaken it’s this unmentioned sequence which forced Anand to resign.
I agree with you, I was wondering the same thing. He probably should have mentioned that in-between Qe7 move.
Queen will just move back to d8. By moving the knight, you've removed the double attack so she isn't required to cover the knight anymore
@@leodf1 if the queen moves back to d8, then pawn d3 continues the double attack but this time with no possible retaliation from black.
At 30:48 i believe you could just take c3 with the queen. Pawn is still pinned and if he takes with queen you take back with the knight and attack the rook. At the end you'd be up a bishop. He can also choose to first take the rook to break the pin, but after rook b8 the pawn is pinned again and you get 2 minor pieces for the rook. Hope i didn't overlook something since i'm still a beginner.
Best teacher i have listened to. Thanks
It's crazy how little people in the room are responding. I would cry
Hey, good stuff guy. You make the game sound more interesting and manageable, rather than learning all these gambits!! I'm bamboozled from all these gambits!!! lol
Great lecture!)
An hour passed just in one breath)
But I feel that the title is a bit misleading (I'm just a beginner, but still) - the point was to show that learning the ideas was more important than to learn the moves; but in the end, I got the impression that the learning of these actually can't be possible without memorizing the moves, without the theory. So, how I undestand now - you can't really get anywhere high without learning the moves, because they form the ideas..)
On point.
Great lesson. Wow, I need to learn openings. I thought it keeps uvula n a box, but I see now. Thx.
At 24:24, white has in between move. After ..Nxd8 white can capture the Bishop first with check. White is down in material but it is still playble instead of Nxb8 for white which obviously loses a piece.
The fact that he still waits for people to respond along the video is not wasted time as he is requesting people to think thoroughly about it.
All that was missing was to add the dread of randomly choosing someone to answer, still remember those school days.
I feel like openings have pretty similar plans so even if you don't know every opening, you can have a pretty good guess as to what the ideas are in an unfamiliar opening based on the plans from a decent subset of familiar openings.
Thanks very much for this invaluable lessons. It is right we should understand why we should move as mentioned, for instance 1. e4 we open the path for the queen and bishop and keep the initiative, we move pawn first to make the way for minor pieces to develop. But such explanation AS I KNOW, seldom appear in the chess books or chess lessons. Chess books elaborate and analyze long calculations as well as the outcome of previous similar games instead. We expect the text move explains the match MOVE BY MOVE every single move why the player makes that move. But again we don't get approriate and adequate datas about that. Please kerp on making explanation like that, Viva Saint Louis. Thanks very much again.
Caleb you rock my socks keep it up man
Loved the way u explained .
I'm learning to play chess .Can u suggest how to go about it .
Layman's advice: play lots of games. And after that - play some more. lichess is good.
Long games and tactics are probably the two most common suggestions for beginners.
Every class on opening ever -
1. Say the notations out loud while playing the moves very fast.
2. This is all theory. - I thought that the theory is what would be explained in the opening class.
@I n T e R e Y e very good channel! Thanks for the recommendation.
Debasish Ray Chawdhuri im glad I fast forwarded through the whole thing this kid was showing us his gameplays
Yes, this was a click bait. A shame, actually. “This is all theory” means you must memorize.
@@digocr That's not true. The idea he was presenting was that you should learn the ideas behind openings and then he showed an example to illustrate that idea. If he spent time on the actual theory it would be contrary to his entire point.
@I n T e R e Y e For a while I thought you suggested him to hang pawns to understand openings and I got so confused. I mean sure there are gambits and stuff but wtf.
Great teaching, Thank you
Great video man!!
good job on the video, very useful
Thank you for this lesson!
Nice work, Caleb
Now I realise how bad I am,I feel like he is speaking the language of gods
awesome lecture.
People watching the Chess lesson "Don't use the word 'ideas' "... wow I think they need to leave the chat.
So I've heard since principles like, never move the same piece twice in the first ten moves, try to develop center, castle the king before move ten. I don't see any of that here. Can you explain?
I think for his age, he did a great job with the lecture. No worse than many college professors ive had.
Thank you for explaining ☺️
28:27 why not capture with the knight and gain a tempo on whites queen?
This is crucial to learning anything. Great video. It’s not ok to just memorize moves. You have to know the why’s of these moves.
Not really. In most cases it's better to memorize the fundamentals even if you don't understand it and later try to grasp or analyze something. Otherwise your "understanding" is basically just memorizing what your teacher said anyway.
For example: How could you possibly understand a historical event without the foundation that is learnt by memorizing and repetition? Which countries? Where are they? What are they like?When? What context? Who? How did they live?
Maybe it's different in chess. It could be. This theacher knows more about chess than me. But I've seen this theory of teaching where you should understand before you memorize and my experience tells me that the teachers that promote that idea most of the time did the opposite themselves and forgot what role the memorized fundamentals had in their process of understanding.
What if at 24:24knight takes bishop(e7) check..then king h8 and then rook takes knight(e1)?should explain that variation also
In the first example the first way to save the knight that comes to mind is Qe7 because it protects the knight and blocks the pin. I'm sure there are also good reasons not to do that but it would have been good to include it.
I was thinking the same thing. Doesn’t it save it? What am I missing
@@Galaxyngc7331 Nd5 attacks queen and threatens a fork on c7 preventing Qe6. If Qd8, then d3 wins the knight.
Wonderful job!
Ilike the explanation. Clearly i understand.
any thoughts on sacrificing a minor piece to break up the kings defender pawns? Say it's the basic 3 pawns in front of a castled king.
I think there is some benefit in memorizing some opening moves in the most common openings. Certainly, you don't have to memorize them 20 moves deep or anything like that. But, if you rely on only applying basic, sound principles in your opening play - you are going to fall into your fair share of opening traps to a number of well-booked, inferior players. If nothing else, memorizing a few opening moves is a good guarantee of not doing anything incredibly stupid for the first dozen moves or so. There are plenty of players who deal themselves a losing hand within the first dozen moves because they are playing inferior opening moves.
The pinnacle of my chess career was once defeating a player rated 2000+ when I was only rated 1600+ simply because he played the White side of the Two Knights Traxler Attack variation. I had studied that extensively, memorizing most of the moves in the most common lines. I just played them robotically as he used up a tremendous amount of time on his clock trying to navigate through it.
Great information thanks
27:54 knight d7 also kinda screws you in this case.
edit: never mind chat told him later xd
Yes!!! Spotted that myself
in the Anand game the commentator neglected to show what happens when black responds to the pin by going Q-e7, breaking the pin...white would then respond N-d5 hitting the Queen which is now overloaded, having to defend his own knight and the c7 square....
29:14
taking with the rook is way worse than taking with the knight.
one line where you take with the knight is Nxb4 Qc4, c5 Rc1, Qb7 xc5, Na6 Qe2, Rxc5 Rd1 etc.
that opens up the kingside with little to no refutation available. (as per the computer)
it worked out because of the opponent's blunder, but it was a mistake i think.
In the first game, the funny thing is that when g3 is played, g4 might have been a better move anyway, leaving it just hanging would have been really interesting. Would black take it and risk facing rooks on the h file as well as the semi open g file ?
At 27:18 you proposed Queen takes pawn, but then wouldn't the Knight be able to fork the queen and the Rook on Nd2? Could you please explain how this is not problematic?
Little bit late responding to this (lol) but he addresses this tactic around the 30 minute mark
At minute 27:50. In this position apart for the bishop directed to the king, doesn't Knight D7 win material?
Reinaldo Chacon That’s exactly what I was thinking, he probably had meant to take with his bishop
I really like this video, however I'm not a strong chess player. What happens in the position in the video after minute 27 second 20 where white can play Nd2 forking the black queen and rook?
Enjoyed this lecture, felt like I was in college again.
I thought my earphones stopped working at 11:58
In the second game, why Kh1? What did that do or avoid? It seemed like it was the problem later in the game
At 24:23 I know it's a strong rook, but is it not better to take a free bishop (Ne7) with check, rather than, as Caleb suggests, trade a knight for a rook (Nb8)?
I just have a question in the first game of Anand, after Qe2, can't black respond with Qe7 ? It sounds okay to me .. i mean qe7, d3, and knight retreats ..
White would play Nd5 instead of d3 forcing the queen to move back resulting the same senerio. If black plays Qe6 attempting to put pressure on the knight white would play Nxc7+ forking the queen and king
So, what did you do after you took his queen?. I wanted to see that because I am a beginner and don't play well at all.
Could you explain how Qd5 at 27:15 is not a blunder from black side? As white can play Nd7 and fork queen and a rook. Unless I'm missing something. Sorry if it's a dumb question, I'm only around 800.
Edit: never mind, it was explained later on in the video 😅
Good job Caleb!
You have to memorize moves AND strategies. The only reason you say you don't need to memorize moves is because you have a good memory naturally. But not everyone has a good memory. I have very good intuition but very bad memory, so I understand this more than anyone else. Every move in chess has a best counter move. You can avoid making the same mistake twice only by memorizing the best counter moves. This is especially important in the opening moves because of the time constraint.
Do you guys stream this every week?
I’ve done a similar check mate at 45:10 but I had bishops stacked on a rook. The look on the opponents face was priceless 😂
Thank you coach
The idea more important than memorizing
I thought, maybe the purpose of White's move, g3, was to place his Bishop on f5, hitting on Black's Queen and preventing a Rook from being placed on b8. But these are all very defensive ideas and further hinders any prospects of a White kingside pawn storm by placing yet another piece in the path of his pawns.
As was stated, when castling on opposite sides, the game is usually very dynamic as both players seek to advance on opposite sides of the board. Each player cannot simply go about their aggressive plan while ignoring their opponent's aggressive plan. Usually, the winning player has a FASTER attack, forcing the other player to completely abandon their attack and go into defensive mode. But, sometimes they can solidify their defensive posture and return to their attack on the other side of the board. It's never boring.
I guess I have a serious aversion to risk in chess and its holding me back. He keeps talking about castling to the opposite sides of the board and attacking/counter-attacking but when I look at 10:15 my mind is screaming for me to castle long as well. And Caro-Kann is my go to opening for black :(