4 ms·

Yes, and in fact that's how openings work. Each opening is a sequence in which both players are making an optimal response to the previous move. If a player dev

Yes, and in fact that's how openings work. Each opening is a sequence in which both players are making an optimal response to the previous move. If a player deviates from the opening, then by definition he just made a suboptimal move.

KC8ZKF 17y ago
Openings aren't demonstrably optimal. (Or there would be only one.) Players make improvements on openings all the time.
- swombat 17y ago
  There are a relatively small number of equally optimal moves (compared to the total number of possible moves) for a given opening, after white has opened in a certain way. The vast majority of moves other than the ones covered in the opening and/or its known variations are indeed sub-optimal, and quite often if someone deviates from one of the great many standard openings, this can be exploited by the opponent.
  - nanijoe 17y ago
    The truth of the matter is that chess players seldom play out a single opening..Since most openings are pretty well known (along with their optimal moves), the beginning part of a chess game is usually spent trying to maneuver your opponent into an opening of your liking (or trick them into thinking you are playing one thing, then switching on them). What starts out looking like the Slav , may end up Queens Indian (as an example), and this makes the 20 moves ahead claim even more ludicrous. There are whole books on (slaying) the dragon variation of the Sicilian defense and the Sicilian is just one option that can result from the first move being e4..of course your opponent can also transpose to a different formation as the game progresses. In the end game where there are relatively few pieces on the board you may be able to plan ahead with more precision, but other than that trying to think 20 moves ahead is not just impractical, it may well be dumb.
  - iron_ball 17y ago
    This is what I meant. Openings aren't traps, and openings can branch as players choose different variations, but to stray from the opening book entirely is seldom a wise move. (That's one reason I never got too far into chess; I realized that competitive play would require a lot of opening knowledge.)

KC8ZKF 17y ago

Openings aren't demonstrably optimal. (Or there would be only one.) Players make improvements on openings all the time.

swombat 17y ago
There are a relatively small number of equally optimal moves (compared to the total number of possible moves) for a given opening, after white has opened in a certain way. The vast majority of moves other than the ones covered in the opening and/or its known variations are indeed sub-optimal, and quite often if someone deviates from one of the great many standard openings, this can be exploited by the opponent.
- nanijoe 17y ago
  The truth of the matter is that chess players seldom play out a single opening..Since most openings are pretty well known (along with their optimal moves), the beginning part of a chess game is usually spent trying to maneuver your opponent into an opening of your liking (or trick them into thinking you are playing one thing, then switching on them). What starts out looking like the Slav , may end up Queens Indian (as an example), and this makes the 20 moves ahead claim even more ludicrous. There are whole books on (slaying) the dragon variation of the Sicilian defense and the Sicilian is just one option that can result from the first move being e4..of course your opponent can also transpose to a different formation as the game progresses. In the end game where there are relatively few pieces on the board you may be able to plan ahead with more precision, but other than that trying to think 20 moves ahead is not just impractical, it may well be dumb.
- iron_ball 17y ago
  This is what I meant. Openings aren't traps, and openings can branch as players choose different variations, but to stray from the opening book entirely is seldom a wise move. (That's one reason I never got too far into chess; I realized that competitive play would require a lot of opening knowledge.)