CraigEvans wrote on 04/28/09 at 21:16:04:
Yes. I'm sure you could learn all of the above lines if you had a free decade. Given that Kasparov couldn't crack the Berlin (even taking into account that the players we play will not be Kramnik), and that Radja continues to make the Schliemann work at super GM level, and that some of the critical lines in the Zaitsev are not reached until move 20+ with countless deviations and move-order subtleties between moves 9-20, not to mention the open leading to a sharp struggle (as does the Archangel), and black can essay one of 6 or 7 other closed lines which all havetheir own positional nuances and ideas, I think you might be trivialising white's task somewhat here.
So there are a couple of critical lines, which opening hasnt? One advantage of the Ruy is that even if you stray from the best path you still have the initiative. This goes in particular for the closed lines. Against all the lines you mention you can do 2 things, go for the most critical lines or choose a sideline. In both cases a perfect memory isnt necessary as you will usually still end up with the initiative. Ie if you go for the Schlieman main line (the one Emms and Khalifman go for) the worst that can happen is an opposite bishop ending a pawn up.
Quote:Not to mention that you are completely ignoring options for black like the Bird, Cozio, 3...Bc5 etc - not necessarily critical tries, but all again relatively sharp systems where white can go quickly wrong if he's not careful.
I simply disagree with this. If you play standard developing moves and aim for c3 and d4 in most cases, you wont go wrong.
Quote:When you add all the above on top of needing lines against the Petroff, Philidor, Latvian, Elephant, and then throw on the fire all black's other possible 1.e4 defences...
The Petrov may be a worry (though there are easy lines there as well), the others arent. They usually are only a bother in blitz as you may need to think a little deeper.
Quote:I suppose your question boils down to what you feel you need to know. But if you want to play the Lopez well as white, you have one hell of a lot of work to do, just on that. I have always been of the opinion that no amateur does (or should) have enough time to really learn and understand the Lopez, and his time is better spent elsewhere learning simpler systems. I have no doubt that 3.Bb5 is white's strongest continuation, but whether it is the most time-efficient way to spend your study time, is a wholly different matter.
Learning and understanding the Ruy is imo impossible unless you are a Russian GM whose name starts with a K
I do however think that the only way to try and do that is to actually play it. I am sure people will have their setbacks, but I think in the long run it is a much better investment than the other lines. You get to work with the initiative, kingside attacks, queenside attacks, nipping nasty counterpunches by black in the bud, space advantage and last but not least you get an actual middle game.
Quote:The problem with the Lopez is that, usually, the stronger player will win at U2200 level. If white does not know the opening well, then he will be gifting black major chances that the Lopez is not meant to give black - white will be at a huge disadvantage if he misplays the opening. Most of black's "inferior" tries like 3...Bc5 and 3...Nd4 are still potent enough to cause problems if white does not know them. Black's major tries (Zaitsev, Chigorin, Breyer, Keres etc) are major, major opening complexes, and a white player who is not familiar with both the theory and the understanding of the openings is in danger of finding himself rapidly being outplayed by a black player who has studied them. This sort of understanding takes a lot of memorisation of long lines, as well as studying a lot of games in each particular line, really working to understand the move orders and subtleties in every position.
The real question is if that is necessary at all. Sure you could learn all the lines in Khalifman by heart, but I dont think it is necessary (I find it very useful but more for analysis after the game or to look up a critical line). I am more in agreement with Cox in his intro in his 1d4 book.
Quote:If this sounds like a couple of afternoons sitting back with a book and a beer, then feel free. To me it seems like a hell of a lot of work for an opening which you would probably get in 1/5th of your games (assuming that 50% you play as black, and 60% of your white games people meet 1.e4 with something other than 1...e5, 2...Nc6 - in most cases this figure is probably even higher).
I would think it is even lower. Out of my last 7 games as white I had none in the Ruy
Still I dont think it is a reason to skip such an opening.