Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Best Software for opening training

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
May 31, 2005 5:42:44 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

Hi all,

I'm looking for software that can be used for opening training. I had in
mind something where you can pick the opening and which color you will
play, and then the computer iterates through different lines. Almost
like a quiz or something to test if you play the right move.

For example, if I'm training for Black, I would have a book with only
one move for black at each position, but different moves for White. The
book would also include mistakes for White and the correct reply for
Black, so I want the software to play some of the bad moves as well. (I
guess it can just iterate through the different lines in the book).
Any ideas?


Thanks,
Gilles
Anonymous
June 1, 2005 12:08:37 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

"Gilles Roy" <groy@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:Jh1ne.9667$_r1.472715@news20.bellglobal.com...
> Hi all,
>
> I'm looking for software that can be used for opening training. I had in
> mind something where you can pick the opening and which color you will
> play, and then the computer iterates through different lines. Almost
> like a quiz or something to test if you play the right move.
>
> For example, if I'm training for Black, I would have a book with only
> one move for black at each position, but different moves for White. The
> book would also include mistakes for White and the correct reply for
> Black, so I want the software to play some of the bad moves as well. (I
> guess it can just iterate through the different lines in the book).
> Any ideas?

Bookup 2000 Express will do that. You can download it and design your
repertoire and try out the training features that do what you described and
more. If you don't register it within 30 days it stops allowing instant
editing but still allows training and PGN import, etc.

Mike Leahy
"The Database Man!"
www.bookup.com
June 1, 2005 1:45:53 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

>I'm looking for software that can be used for opening training.

You might take a look at www.chesspositiontrainer.com, a free trainer
program.

John.
Related resources
Anonymous
June 8, 2005 9:36:39 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

jef,

Is that *your* superchess website?
June 8, 2005 6:19:14 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

John wrote:>>I'm looking for software that can be used for opening training.
>
>
> You might take a look at www.chesspositiontrainer.com, a free trainer
> program.

yep, i found it a bit complicated in use, that's the result
of fast prototyping; it hasn't been thought out very well,
for the rest it's a matter of what you want to learn/do
or whatever in the area of opening theory.
Bookup, Bookbuilder and Chessbase are good programs,
Chessbase is a bit expensive but you also can do more
with it; for the rest opening training isn't so important
unless you are over 2000 or so.
best regards
jefk
http://superchess.com
Anonymous
June 9, 2005 6:03:18 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

No, you're certainly *not* spamming, your response was *solicited*. I
asked only because there is a couple of obvious typos, on this page,
which you may wish to correct:

http://superchess.com/

"2) with it's backsolving finetuned opening books can easliy be made."

The possessive "its", in your version, contains an apostrophe, when it
should not, and "easliy" should, of course, read "easily".

Best regards,
Mark
June 9, 2005 11:18:24 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

Mark Houlsby schreef:
> jef,
>
> Is that *your* superchess website?
>
yes it is; now i guess you will say
mentioning my own site is spamming,
but i don't care. Besides Bookbuilder
(which now that Chess PositionTrainer
has been made doesnt receive much
attention anymore anyway) i've got
some other plans with the site, which
you probably will see later this year.
Computer chess isnt really a serious
commercial activity for me anymore.
best regards,
jef
June 10, 2005 5:07:30 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

Mark Houlsby wrote:
>
> The possessive "its", in your version, contains an apostrophe, when it
> should not, and "easliy" should, of course, read "easily".

ok, i'll correct that, thx

and answering again about best software for opening training:
well, maybe the Chessbase powerbook DVD would be a good tool;
haven't bought it yet; i guess you first need a repertoire
(as discussed earlier), and then start opening training;
besides the more important tactics training ofcourse
Anonymous
June 14, 2005 8:32:03 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

>> You might take a look at www.chesspositiontrainer.com, a free trainer
>> program.
>
> yep, i found it a bit complicated in use, that's the result
> of fast prototyping; it hasn't been thought out very well,
> for the rest it's a matter of what you want to learn/do
> or whatever in the area of opening theory.
> Bookup, Bookbuilder and Chessbase are good programs,
> Chessbase is a bit expensive but you also can do more
> with it; for the rest opening training isn't so important
> unless you are over 2000 or so.

Ever think maybe people go over 2000 because they study openings rather than
the other way around?


--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

Seduction Made Easy: http://www.cybersheet.com/easy.html
Get this book FREE when you purchase ANY affiliated product!

Visit our FREE SPEECH SEDUCTION REVIEW message boards at:
http://cybersheet.com/eve/ubb.x
Compare over a dozen different seduction e-books and get SME for FREE if you
buy!

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.
Anonymous
June 16, 2005 11:43:51 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

Mike Leahy wrote:
> "Ray Gordon" <ray@cybersheet.com> wrote in message
> news:75tre.24405$IX4.23224@twister.nyc.rr.com...
> > >> You might take a look at www.chesspositiontrainer.com, a free trainer
> > >> program.
> > >
> > > yep, i found it a bit complicated in use, that's the result
> > > of fast prototyping; it hasn't been thought out very well,
> > > for the rest it's a matter of what you want to learn/do
> > > or whatever in the area of opening theory.
> > > Bookup, Bookbuilder and Chessbase are good programs,
> > > Chessbase is a bit expensive but you also can do more
> > > with it; for the rest opening training isn't so important
> > > unless you are over 2000 or so.
> >
> > Ever think maybe people go over 2000 because they study openings rather
> than
> > the other way around?
>
> I have found that folks who put serious effort into their openings go over
> 2000 much faster.
>

So why haven't you?

> In my 20 years' experience I've also come across lots of class players who
> are certain that opening theory should be largely ignored in lieu of
> tactics, and curiously those folks remain class players for years. :) 
>

Maybe their endgame knowledge (i.e. its being too basic and sketchy
[rather like mine]) is to blame?

> IHMO if one wants to be a GM, do what a GM does.

So, if a patzer plays at Linares he/she will be a GM?

> If one wants to be a
> patzer, do what patzers do. The grandmasters I have known (when they are
> working on their game) study openings and tactics 3-5 hours each day.
>

Right, but their being grandmasters makes the opening study part
worthwhile. Studying tactics is definitely good. Studying endgames
also. Unless one is a master, studying openings is a waste of time.

You are becoming increasingly disingenuous, Mike. This fails to
impress.

Give an example of a patzer who, as a result of using BookUp, has
become a GM.

Go on. Just *one* example.

Mark Houlsby
Anonymous
June 16, 2005 2:02:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

>I'm guessing that you've ignored the *two* examples (testimonials) on our
website, one from a patzer who became a master and credits Bookup, and
the
other from GM Peter Svidler who made it very clear that it was his
openings
preparation that propelled him to "super GM" status. I used his words
for
his testimonial. Maybe I should go back and ask to quote him on the
openings thing.

Your guess is wrong. I'm not ignoring anything. Concerning the
testimonials, *we've been over this already*.

In the former case, you're talking about Larry Stevens, who, it seems,
as part of his training regimen, used BookUp before becoming a master.
This suggests that he is:

1) unusually talented

and

2) unusually disciplined, yet it seems to have failed to propel him to
Svidler status.

In the latter case, you're talking about Peter Svidler, Super GM, (and
super guy) who derived benefit from BookUp only because he was *already
a master*.

Stop trolling, dude.

>Maybe you should come up with just one example of a teacher who got a patzer
to become a master without concentrating on openings. :)  Not a teacher
who
believes this is the right approach, but a teacher who actually pulled
it
off.

Ok, how about this guy:

http://makeashorterlink.com/?R2D56264B

....who may have taught himself (much as most BookUp users might)?

I do not, and never have suggested that someone 2100+ could not benefit
from using BookUp. Concerning the rest of us, it's a waste of time and
money.

Mark Houlsby
Anonymous
June 16, 2005 5:33:17 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

"Ray Gordon" <ray@cybersheet.com> wrote in message
news:75tre.24405$IX4.23224@twister.nyc.rr.com...
> >> You might take a look at www.chesspositiontrainer.com, a free trainer
> >> program.
> >
> > yep, i found it a bit complicated in use, that's the result
> > of fast prototyping; it hasn't been thought out very well,
> > for the rest it's a matter of what you want to learn/do
> > or whatever in the area of opening theory.
> > Bookup, Bookbuilder and Chessbase are good programs,
> > Chessbase is a bit expensive but you also can do more
> > with it; for the rest opening training isn't so important
> > unless you are over 2000 or so.
>
> Ever think maybe people go over 2000 because they study openings rather
than
> the other way around?

I have found that folks who put serious effort into their openings go over
2000 much faster.

In my 20 years' experience I've also come across lots of class players who
are certain that opening theory should be largely ignored in lieu of
tactics, and curiously those folks remain class players for years. :) 

IHMO if one wants to be a GM, do what a GM does. If one wants to be a
patzer, do what patzers do. The grandmasters I have known (when they are
working on their game) study openings and tactics 3-5 hours each day.


Mike Leahy
"The Database Man!"
www.bookup.com
Anonymous
June 16, 2005 8:17:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

"Mark Houlsby" <mark.houlsby@eudoramail.com> wrote in message
news:1118933030.993328.69370@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Give an example of a patzer who, as a result of using BookUp, has
> become a GM.
>
> Go on. Just *one* example.
>
> Mark Houlsby

I'm guessing that you've ignored the *two* examples (testimonials) on our
website, one from a patzer who became a master and credits Bookup, and the
other from GM Peter Svidler who made it very clear that it was his openings
preparation that propelled him to "super GM" status. I used his words for
his testimonial. Maybe I should go back and ask to quote him on the
openings thing.

Maybe you should come up with just one example of a teacher who got a patzer
to become a master without concentrating on openings. :)  Not a teacher who
believes this is the right approach, but a teacher who actually pulled it
off.


Mike Leahy
"The Database Man!"
www.bookup.com
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 3:30:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

Leahy wrote:
>I'm finding that anyone who has an informed opinion that differs from yours
is branded a troll.

Are you, indeed? Would you care to cite examples?

>I can't tell from this link/post if any such teacher (or player) exists.

That doesn't surprise me.

http://makeashorterlink.com/?N2255284B

If Nick can find Terry in FIDE's list, why can't you? Is it because
you're dumb, as well as a troll?

>For the first 5 years we sold Bookup, it was purchased and used primarily by
experts and up. I grant you that they were the ones more likely to be
able
to get great use out of it.

Good!

>For the last 15 years we've had exceptional ebooks on openings, middlegames,
endgames and tactics which make the program valuable to class players.

With respect to endgames and tactics, this may be true. With respect to
the rest, nonsense.

Now, if you reply to *this* post, it had better be to cite evidence of
my calling anyone who disagrees with me a "troll". If you can't do
that, we'll take it as *confirmation* that you *admit* to *your* being
a spamming troll.

Ok?

Mark Houlsby
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 7:44:31 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

Oh I see, so you're ILLITERATE as well as dumb and a troll.

Clearly, your being a troll is already established, since you keep
posting the same old already-refuted nonsense about BookUp. BookUp is
not all bad, by any means, but it's not all that you claim it to be,
either.

Now, when I suggested that you should cite evidence of my calling
anybody who disagrees with me a troll, you might perhaps have had the
guile to understand that I meant somebody who had not *clearly
established already* that he is a troll, such as you have.

*If* you reply to *this* post, you may be advised to have learned from
your very elementary mistake, and find an example of my having called
someone a troll with respect to whom the evidence *does not indicate
their being a troll*.

There is a considerable amount of evidence which indicates your being a
troll, (heck there's evidence just in this thread) so my calling you a
troll is *justified*.

DUH!

What's your next move, smart guy?
Anonymous
June 17, 2005 9:41:08 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

"Mark Houlsby" <mark.houlsby@eudoramail.com> wrote in message
news:1118941365.680174.119620@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> >I'm guessing that you've ignored the *two* examples (testimonials) on our
> website, one from a patzer who became a master and credits Bookup, and
> the
> other from GM Peter Svidler who made it very clear that it was his
> openings
> preparation that propelled him to "super GM" status. I used his words
> for
> his testimonial. Maybe I should go back and ask to quote him on the
> openings thing.
>
> Your guess is wrong. I'm not ignoring anything. Concerning the
> testimonials, *we've been over this already*.

Consider that *your* guess is wrong. I can pick from dozens of quotes from
players with similar results with Bookup. I just happened to as Larry for
his permission to post this years ago.

> In the former case, you're talking about Larry Stevens, who, it seems,
> as part of his training regimen, used BookUp before becoming a master.
> This suggests that he is:
>
> 1) unusually talented

I suppose you could dismiss all Bookup successes as unusually talented. And
perhaps they would agree. :) 

> and
>
> 2) unusually disciplined, yet it seems to have failed to propel him to
> Svidler status.
>
> In the latter case, you're talking about Peter Svidler, Super GM, (and
> super guy) who derived benefit from BookUp only because he was *already
> a master*.
>
> Stop trolling, dude.

I'm finding that anyone who has an informed opinion that differs from yours
is branded a troll.

> >Maybe you should come up with just one example of a teacher who got a
patzer
> to become a master without concentrating on openings. :)  Not a teacher
> who
> believes this is the right approach, but a teacher who actually pulled
> it
> off.
>
> Ok, how about this guy:
>
> http://makeashorterlink.com/?R2D56264B
>
> ...who may have taught himself (much as most BookUp users might)?

I can't tell from this link/post if any such teacher (or player) exists.

> I do not, and never have suggested that someone 2100+ could not benefit
> from using BookUp. Concerning the rest of us, it's a waste of time and
> money.

For the first 5 years we sold Bookup, it was purchased and used primarily by
experts and up. I grant you that they were the ones more likely to be able
to get great use out of it.

For the last 15 years we've had exceptional ebooks on openings, middlegames,
endgames and tactics which make the program valuable to class players.


Mike Leahy
"The Database Man!"
www.bookup.com
www.chessopeningspgn.com
Anonymous
June 18, 2005 2:01:34 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

"Mark Houlsby" <mark.houlsby@eudoramail.com> wrote in message
news:1119033039.246847.228570@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Leahy wrote:
> >I'm finding that anyone who has an informed opinion that differs from
yours
> is branded a troll.
>
> Are you, indeed? Would you care to cite examples?

How about the line below?

> If Nick can find Terry in FIDE's list, why can't you? Is it because
> you're dumb, as well as a troll?

> Now, if you reply to *this* post, it had better be to cite evidence of
> my calling anyone who disagrees with me a "troll".

QED

> If you can't do
> that, we'll take it as *confirmation* that you *admit* to *your* being
> a spamming troll.
>
> Ok?

Ok! :) 
Anonymous
June 19, 2005 9:19:18 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 06:33:17 -0700, Mike Leahy wrote:


>
> I have found that folks who put serious effort into their openings go
> over 2000 much faster.
>
> In my 20 years' experience I've also come across lots of class players
> who are certain that opening theory should be largely ignored in lieu of
> tactics, and curiously those folks remain class players for years. :) 
>
> IHMO if one wants to be a GM, do what a GM does. If one wants to be a
> patzer, do what patzers do. The grandmasters I have known (when they are
> working on their game) study openings and tactics 3-5 hours each day.
>
>
> Mike Leahy
> "The Database Man!"
> www.bookup.com

ok im a serious patzer :)  rating around 1300 on icc. I have read
several conflicting quotes from various GMS about what to study first.
I believe they are all correct at some level

from 1000-1600 i am studying
- mainly tactics
- endgame theory
- position basics
- learn 1 opening for white completely
- learn 1 opening defense for d4, one for e4
- learn from early master games (ie morphy etc...)

for my openings I am trying to learn as much as possible about the three
that I have chosen. but it isnt my only focus. It is my lowest priority.
I train with
- chessmaster 10k . The study material for this is simply the best i
have found.
- I record all my standard games on ICC and have Fritz8 go through them
and point out my many blunders.
- I have recently bought CT-ART and am going through this
- I constantly have a tactics 'puzzle' book on me and do as much as
possible in any spare time.
- I carry a Gameboy Advance with Chessmaster on me at all times. For
when I get enough time (atleast a 15 period) so I can play a game.
- use fritz and chessbase lite to go over games of morphy every day


At this level I believe a program like bookup isnt for me. I use
Chessmaster 10k right now for learning openings. But when (if?) I reach
the next level I believe that bookup would be very valuable.

from 1600-2200 (if I reach it :)  ) I plan to
- study positional play, probably by using 'studies 2.0'
- continue using CT-ART
- continue to use Fritz to look over all my standard games
- start using a program like 'bookup' to learn more about openings
- study more mid 1900 GM's games (games tend to get more complicated with
time)

at this level I will spend more time on openings, at a much deeper level,
but will concentrate on more 'strategy' than anything else. Hopefully at
this level I will have learned enough tactics to stop hanging my pieces
:) 

If I ever get past this point... I will probably spend the majority of my
time studying openings...

Since I am a canadian I have taken alot of advice from GM Kevin Spraggett
http://www.kevinspraggett.com/reflecti.htm

This is my 'plan' to become a GM :)  it may be way offbase but like Ray
Gordon, I believe that I can become atleast a master at my ancient age
(35) :) 

I have been playing for less than one year. I have gone from 800 to 1300
on icc. Not spectacular, but I have consitantly progressed and have
learned alot. and have had fun doing it :) ))

J.Lohner
icc 'Inconnux'
June 25, 2005 12:52:26 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

interesting posting.
from my experience eg. teaching nephews, it helps
to have an opening repertoire, also on your level,
especially at slower games.
when arriving at 1800 (which personally i haven't yet),
studying the openings in your repertoire definitely helps at
competitive otb standard chess (eg a game of 90 minutes pp).

to have a look at a repertoire with 1.e4 lower rated players
<1800 could use Bookbuilder, anyway cheaper than Bookup;
higher rated players in general seem to use ChessBase, for
whatever purpose, i guess. too bloody expensive imho,
but anyway, it's not the tools which makes the master,
but mostly the talent, *and* the hard work (reading, practice
etc.) of course; chess is not for lazy people i've discovered
:) 
best regards,
jef
http://superchess.com


Inconnux wrote:
> ok im a serious patzer :)  rating around 1300 on icc. I have read
> several conflicting quotes from various GMS about what to study first.
> I believe they are all correct at some level
>
> from 1000-1600 i am studying
> - mainly tactics
> - endgame theory
> - position basics
> - learn 1 opening for white completely
> - learn 1 opening defense for d4, one for e4
> - learn from early master games (ie morphy etc...)
>
> for my openings I am trying to learn as much as possible about the three
> that I have chosen. but it isnt my only focus. It is my lowest priority.
> I train with
> - chessmaster 10k . The study material for this is simply the best i
> have found.
> - I record all my standard games on ICC and have Fritz8 go through them
> and point out my many blunders.
> - I have recently bought CT-ART and am going through this
> - I constantly have a tactics 'puzzle' book on me and do as much as
> possible in any spare time.
> - I carry a Gameboy Advance with Chessmaster on me at all times. For
> when I get enough time (atleast a 15 period) so I can play a game.
> - use fritz and chessbase lite to go over games of morphy every day
>
>
> At this level I believe a program like bookup isnt for me. I use
> Chessmaster 10k right now for learning openings. But when (if?) I reach
> the next level I believe that bookup would be very valuable.
>
> from 1600-2200 (if I reach it :)  ) I plan to
> - study positional play, probably by using 'studies 2.0'
> - continue using CT-ART
> - continue to use Fritz to look over all my standard games
> - start using a program like 'bookup' to learn more about openings
> - study more mid 1900 GM's games (games tend to get more complicated with
> time)
>
> at this level I will spend more time on openings, at a much deeper level,
> but will concentrate on more 'strategy' than anything else. Hopefully at
> this level I will have learned enough tactics to stop hanging my pieces
> :) 
>
> If I ever get past this point... I will probably spend the majority of my
> time studying openings...
>
> Since I am a canadian I have taken alot of advice from GM Kevin Spraggett
> http://www.kevinspraggett.com/reflecti.htm
>
> This is my 'plan' to become a GM :)  it may be way offbase but like Ray
> Gordon, I believe that I can become atleast a master at my ancient age
> (35) :) 
>
> I have been playing for less than one year. I have gone from 800 to 1300
> on icc. Not spectacular, but I have consitantly progressed and have
> learned alot. and have had fun doing it :) ))
>
> J.Lohner
> icc 'Inconnux'
Anonymous
June 25, 2005 5:17:46 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 20:52:26 +0200, jef <kec@wanadoo.nl> wrote:

>interesting posting.
>from my experience eg. teaching nephews, it helps
>to have an opening repertoire, also on your level,
>especially at slower games.
>when arriving at 1800 (which personally i haven't yet),
>studying the openings in your repertoire definitely helps at
>competitive otb standard chess (eg a game of 90 minutes pp).
>
>to have a look at a repertoire with 1.e4 lower rated players
><1800 could use Bookbuilder, anyway cheaper than Bookup;
>higher rated players in general seem to use ChessBase, for
>whatever purpose, i guess. too bloody expensive imho,
>but anyway, it's not the tools which makes the master,
>but mostly the talent, *and* the hard work (reading, practice
>etc.) of course; chess is not for lazy people i've discovered
>:) 
>best regards,
>jef
>http://superchess.com
>

I do have a small opening rep. I am learning one opening for white,
and two black defenses. I also am learning 'opening principles'.

I believe that I should learn tactics and positional play first, as
well as a small opening repertoire. Once I get the basics then I can
concentrate more on the openings.
June 25, 2005 11:02:21 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.chess.computer (More info?)

hello
Inconnux wrote:
> I do have a small opening rep. I am learning one opening for white,
> and two black defenses. I also am learning 'opening principles'.

one opening for white ?
there can be many black responses.
of course you can play the kings indian attack
(Nf3, g3, Bg2), but even then some knowledge
of several variants would be useful i guess.

two black defenses ?
one against d4, and one against e4, i presume.
Fair enough; and what against c4 ?
and how to transpose you defense against 1.Nf3
to your preferred d4 defense ?

for the rest, yes general opening principles
are more important than memorizing variants.
when playing gambits, for example, a chess
player usually keeps in mind the development
of his pieces, rather than defending one simple
pawn. often you get quite interesting games
from such play. look at Morphy's games for
example. Good luck,

jef
!