Thanks all; some interesting comments.  Will order my copy of Vol 2 and try to finsh my Vol 1.......

slates wrote on 02/12/09 at 07:47:10:

The petrov is a decent option imo. At lower levels white often can't deal with the initiative, so you often fight on equal footing in an open position. It also has the advantage that you dont run into Max Langes, Grecos and that kind of thing in which young players often have made quite a study (I never play e5 against young players for that reason). You miss out on the Ruy though. It is also relatively light on theory. I mean you dont have to study much to be able to play it decently.

Ie Yesterday I played a game against the Petrov and I was out of book at about move 6 or 7 after which I made a sub-optimal move. After that I still had the initiative, but I had real problems.

Paddy wrote on 02/10/09 at 13:01:07:


This sounds like an interesting book.  I like Yusupov's first in this series, but the second sounds better.  My son is nearly 11 and I need to show him some openings now, or at least get him some experience in the Open Games; sadly I have missed out on this part of my education, always playing Semi-Open games myself as a latecomer to chess.  

Do you think the material is sufficient to get a beginning youngster up and running (or, for that matter, a casual blitzer like myself) ?

I am happy to try to 'start over' with some basic advice and learn the Open Games along with my son if the material covers just enough to get going, i.e. not to get creamed in the KG, something I found sometimes happened on the occasions I ventured it in my attempts to get some Open Games experience via the combination of Marin's book and John Cox Berlin book; I rarely got to the Berlin in my blitz games for all the KGs and Bishops Openings....

To be fair to those (excellent) books the fault was mine rather than theirs, although I didn't like the Kings Gambit Declined choice of Marin so Yusupov's treatment may be a better approach.  

I like the idea of the Petroff, too, despite the negative connotations people attach to it - I usually play a Caro so I'm perhaps in the right mindset.  My main concern would be that for an under 12 year old to be looking at the Petroff.....well, would that be something that might arguably take some of the fun out of chess for a beginner?  Or should it be viewed more as a way to get a foot inside the door of the Open Games, with a view to venturing further into the room once you're coping with stuff like the KG, Bishops etc?

Curious to know your views. 

By the way, does Yusupov suggest anything to play as Black against 1.d4 by any chance? 

If I offer my son the Slav I currently play there may be people who would argue that I am condemning his chess development to a future of dull passivity, what with the proposed Petroff as well.....

Greetings,

First of all, let me say I'm not a titled player (my best rating was 1950 back in 1999 - I haven't played since and am trying to get back into playing again).

Nor am I involved in coaching - of any age...except myself! 

Were I involved in coaching youngsters, I'd most likely research approaches used by those involved in such - particularly successful coaches.

The books by Snyder, whose proven record in coaching youngsters to US national titles, would be my first port of call to see what/how he does it. Even if you're not intending such a level of competitiveness, his methods obviously work!

As for openings, I'd certainly recommend teaching them the open games - as TN has already pointed out.

As a guide - for myself as much as the youngsters - I'd probably use Emms' book, Play The Open Games As Black, which would cover everything except the Ruy Lopez. For that, I'd probably go with a suggestion of Markovich's (in another forum) regarding the Classical Defence (involving ...,Bc5) for it's similarity to ideas with which the youngsters would already be familiar from both sides of the Giuoco Piano (including the Two Knights Defence, as covered in Emms' book). I also liked TN's suggestion of the Alapin (c3) Sicilian for its simple approach to development - again, the basic ideas would be familiar to the youngsters from their exposure to the open games as white (Danish/Goring/Scotch Gambits).

As regards TN's comment regarding the Open Sicilians, as and when they were introduced to them, I'd suggest the Classical Variation - according to Russian GMs (I forget which ones said this), this is the first Sicilian they are taught, as it apparently includes all the thematic play found in the other variations.

I can't comment on the French, as I have no experience of it - perhaps the Exchange Variation is a idea, on the grounds that it leads to open positions and play, though they'd have to be alerted to the other possibilities for both sides.

(The Scandinavian is also a possibility for open play - its similarity to the Caro-Kann's pawn structure could be a interesting way to teach/compare both openings at a later stage.)

For the black side of d-pawn openings, again, TN's suggestions (KID/Benoni) are both good, for their their aggressive nature, apart from their topicality. (Relatively simpler, though still rich in possibilities for both sides, is the Old Indian Defence, which bears certain similarities to Philidor's Defence.) The modern Benoni move-order (1...,Nf6/2...,e6) would also be useful for teaching them the NID/QID complex later.

The QGA is also a possibility.

That's how I'd approach it - but there are those here who are both titled and involved in coaching, so you'd be better listening to them!

Kindest regards,

Dragan Glas

D-1993F2 wrote on 01/30/09 at 07:18:38:


It really does depend on how much experience a junior already has. Here's a quick summary of what I see, year after year, group after group. They tend to go through these rough stages:

Stage 1: chaotic - "I feel like moving this there, hey, I just lost my queen, oh dear, never mind, lots of pieces left", etc.

Stage 2: acquiring cunning, learning from experience, a growing awareness of the weakness of f2 and f7, and a few techniques and traps, such as Scholar's Mate and how to defend against it, the Petroff trap, the Fried Liver. At the same time beginning to sense the different strengths of the pieces (the reality behind the point count) learning how to mate with K+Q (and maybe even K+R), how to avoid stalemating the opponent. Learning that there is an opponent on the other side of the board, whose intentions are just as evil and cunning as our own...

Stage 3: "Scholar's mate is for little kids. Me, I know that chess is really all about playing in the centre, developing my pieces and castling." Hence the prevalence in junior chess of the Giuoco Pianissimo (aka the "Old Stodge"), with Pe4, knights on f3 and c3, Bc4, Pd3, 0-0. Most kids go through a phase of this, and will often revert to it (against anything) when feeling insecure.

Stage 4: beginning to play real chess; learning some more opening ideas, some brave souls even experimenting with gambits (first they have to learn the value of material, then how to give it up in exchange for time and position...)

After that it's using books and computers, maybe getting coaching, developing their own preferences in openings, playing in tournaments, not really much different from adult chess really.

All the time, they are playing, playing, developing tactical skills, some basic strategic ideas, stamina, foresight, patience... The harder they try, the more it hurts when they lose; it's tough, but they've got to get used to it if they want to make progress. For some the pleasure-pain balance between winning and losing is just too skewed towards pain, and those players should be encouraged to take up something other than such an unforgiving competitive activity - or just play their friends for fun - no disgrace in that.

Some never progress beyond a particular stage, some move through the stages at amazing speed!

There are suggestions for coaching openings and other aspects of the game at

http://www.btinternet.com/~cccs.chess/ChessClubCoaching.htm

and lots of interesting ideas and material, for players and parents, at

http://www.chesskids.com

and

http://www.exeterchessclub.org.uk/index.php

I agree with comments above that it probably does not matter so much and that if they have some openings that they have seen and want to play, then that's just what they should do. So any comments below are more from the "if they came to me and complained that they had no idea what to play in the opening".

TN wrote on 01/30/09 at 22:56:37:

I very much agree with the Alapin recommendation, the Alapin is about simple straightforward chess. For the Giuoco Piano one should probably show them a plans so that they play it with some idea of what they are trying to do (and point out that 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Nc3 isn't such a good idea). Regarding the Panov-Botvinnik Caro-Kann maybe main line 3.Nc3 stuff is also quite a sensible choice, it may be easier to play that without knowing theory.

TN wrote on 01/30/09 at 22:56:37:

King's Indian or Benoni have something to recommend them in that they often feature the same ideas again and again. On the other hand the a6 Slav is a very good "get your pieces out and then play" opening, particularly if white does not know what to do against it.

I think they need some idea that not every move has equal value as an opening salvo.

Nothing wrong with promting the Open Games with White and as Black versus e4.

When opponents play d4, they need to know a differnt system, so introduction to something such as Tarrasch with emphasizes piece development makes sense, I think.

All this can be done without stressing "openings" per se, as I agree in principle that studying openings is not so important

I have a 7 year old that is competing in tournaments in US D sections (u/1200) and have found they need some opening ideas at this play level, but are still a wee bit away from needing to know any "theory".

I think.

It is interesting to see what they choose on their accord own when faced with certain openings.  I like seeing what they come up with and wait for the questions before I even mention words such as "sicilain defense," and/or "Najdorf."  

A good grounding in principles and I sit back to be amazed how kids can create playable positions for themselves.