Mr. Gardner asks:

I’m a correspondence player pretty much, as I don’t have the time to play competitively, and have always made do with the MCO openings and a working knowledge of opening theory when I can’t find the line. In many, many games I play the line isn’t there – probably in most instances because they players aren’t that good, but not always. I noticed that you recommended ECO in Reassess Your Chess, but then you do NOT recommend the modern version on your web site. I got right to the point of buying the 1974 version from a used bookseller and then it occurred to me that someone has probably put together a database that is better and that I can buy cheaper than $125. Is this the case? Or would you still recommend that I go with the older version of ECO?  Thanks for taking the time to respond!

Silman replies:

Opening theory has become so important in serious games that books like ECO, though good for setting up repertoire foundations, are no longer adequate as serious tools for preparation. Nowhere is this more pronounced than in postal, where many mainstream and odd lines are analyzed out far into the middlegame, and occasionally even reach the endgame.

I would not consider playing a postal game without an up to the minute database (at least two million games). Thankfully, acquiring the latest games (free!) is a breeze thanks to http://www.chesscenter.com/twic/twic.html and other sites of that kind. On top of that, I would also get a solid postal database (these can easily exceed 500,000 games) AND back it up with key books in the systems I play.

Examples of what I mean by “key books” are:

John Watson’s PLAY THE FRENCH if you’re a fan of the French Defense.

John Watson’s THE GAMBIT GUIDE TO THE MODERN BENONI if you want to play the Benoni.

Carsten Hansen’s THE NIMZO-INDIAN 4.e3 if you play either side of this very popular opening setup.

This list goes on and on, but why reinvent the wheel? Pick up a nice library covering the highlights of your repertoire. These books explain many key ideas of your choice systems, give you original analysis, and put over 100 years of grandmaster experience in your pocket before you even fire up your database!

MUST I MEMORIZE?

Mr. Tangen asks:

My question to you is this: I have just recently resuscitated my love for chess and have opened myself up to the chess world. In the meantime, I am completely overwhelmed with the wealth of opening theory. Now, I do understand the importance of good opening theory comprehension, but I feel that there is so much out there, I could spend my whole lifetime studying that and nothing else! So I’m wondering, how much time (percentage of all my time I devote to studying chess, whether that’s a lot or very little) would you suggest I spend studying and memorizing opening theory? Sometimes I feel my time is completely wasted memorizing countless lines when all I should be able to do is understand the principles of all the first openings (1.e4, 1.d4, 1.c4, 1.f4, 1.Nf3, etc.), and not bother memorizing anything. Is that logical? Should I memorize lines all the way through, sometimes up to 10 or 11 moves for both black and white? Is it okay to take an opening up to, say, 4 moves, and after that rely on my positional/tactical understanding by playing moves that I see fit regardless of whether there are standard opening lines that would take it further up to 10 or 11 moves?

Silman replies:

I’ve discussed the problem of opening study quite a bit in past letters, and highly recommend you take a look at the LETTERS ARCHIVE.

The first question that must be asked concerns your rating, and your eventual goal. If you wish to be a chess master, at least a basic understanding of most openings is called for. If you are in the 1100-1800 category, creating an easy to learn repertoire with clear but effective ideas and plans might be the way to go. If you seek chess stardom, then serious opening study will be necessary.

Since the vast majority of players are in the 1100-1800 range, we’ll only address these people here. Many in this rating group find openings like the Colle (1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 e6 4.Bd3 with the idea of Nbd2, c3, 0-0 and e3-e4) are highly effective, and can be learned in a couple hours time. If you wish to stay true to more mainstream systems, then a repertoire of 1.e4 is fine, with White answering 1…c5 with 2.Nf3 Nc6 (or 2…d6) 3.Bb5 (easy to learn and very dangerous). I won’t go into more detail, but it’s not too difficult to fashion a low maintenance repertoire. You can do this yourself, hire a master to do it for you, or buy one of the many fine repertoire books that have recently appeared.

Personally, I don’t think any non-master should spend more than 20% of his/her study time on openings. Middlegame play and the close examination of master games should take up the lion’s share of your chess time (about 70%), with the final 10% going to endgames.