Answers.Body: <p>There does not seem to be a consensus on this, but here is a relevant discussion:</p>
  
  <p><a href="https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-equipment/chess-opening-reference-books?page=1" rel="noreferrer">https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-equipment/chess-opening-reference-books?page=1</a></p>
  
  <p>For printed opening material (as you requested) I prefer ECO with Chess Informant updates for new opening ideas and analysis:
  <a href="http://www.chessinformant.org/about-chess-informant/" rel="noreferrer">http://www.chessinformant.org/about-chess-informant/</a></p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2016-06-06T20:29:21.410Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2016-06-06T20:29:21.410Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: David
Answers.Body: <p>I can't speak on the usefulness of ECO for serious study. However, I can tell you that <a href="https://www.openingtree.com/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.openingtree.com/</a> (which is not a printed reference, but is relevant to the title) is much easier than a book to search: just play the moves, and the most common lines with white/draw/black percentages are displayed. You can search by Lichess players, chess.com players, notable chess players, and notable chess events, as well as see the most common lines played and game results. The site touts a testimonial that &quot;It's so powerful&quot; from IM Eric Rosen. Lichess and chess.com offer similar opening explorers, with Lichess and chess.com having Stockfish integration in the browser.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-06-17T00:56:31.250Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2021-06-17T00:56:31.250Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: qwr
Answers.Body: <p>IMO, this is an area that needs work.  I developed a small computer program to check for duplicates in openings and found that most opening categorizations contain duplicate positions.  For example,  Schiller's opening list has duplicate openings.  The same positions arise through different move orders but are named differently.  ECO is far too general.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2017-02-03T21:20:17.270Z
Answers.Text: I don't think the question was about opening names.
Answers.UserDisplayName: RemcoGerlich
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-06-17T09:35:43.210Z
Answers.Text: In some situations it's good to have those duplicate positions. If I want to study the Queen's Gambit, I don't know to go look 250 pages away every time I enter some line that could be reached from a Panov Attack at mvoe 15.
Answers.UserDisplayName: David
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2017-02-02T20:47:40.630Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2017-02-02T20:47:40.630Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: ToddM
Answers.Body: <p>Maybe, but it doesn't mean much. Any version of ECO will always be an inferior, cumbersome substitute for an opening explorer.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-06-17T09:33:50.757Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2021-06-17T09:33:50.757Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: David
Body: <p>Is ECO, Encyclopedia of Chess Openings still considered the best printed reference work for all the chess openings, as it was back in the '80s? </p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2016-06-04T04:47:52.087Z
Comments.Text: I prefer MCO instead.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Jimmy360
Tags: <opening><books><eco>
Title: Is ECO still the best reference for all chess openings?
ThreadText: # Is ECO still the best reference for all chess openings?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2016-05-31)
  
  Is ECO, Encyclopedia of Chess Openings still considered the best printed reference work for all the chess openings, as it was back in the '80s?
  
  **Tags:** opening, books, eco
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: I prefer MCO instead.  
  
  ---
  
  ## 4 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_2 on 2016-06-06. Score: 5
  
  There does not seem to be a consensus on this, but here is a relevant discussion:
  
  <https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-equipment/chess-opening-reference-books?page=1>
  
  For printed opening material (as you requested) I prefer ECO with Chess Informant updates for new opening ideas and analysis:
  <http://www.chessinformant.org/about-chess-informant/>
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_3 on 2021-06-17. Score: 2
  
  I can't speak on the usefulness of ECO for serious study. However, I can tell you that <https://www.openingtree.com/> (which is not a printed reference, but is relevant to the title) is much easier than a book to search: just play the moves, and the most common lines with white/draw/black percentages are displayed. You can search by Lichess players, chess.com players, notable chess players, and notable chess events, as well as see the most common lines played and game results. The site touts a testimonial that "It's so powerful" from IM Eric Rosen. Lichess and chess.com offer similar opening explorers, with Lichess and chess.com having Stockfish integration in the browser.
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_4 on 2017-02-02. Score: 1
  
  IMO, this is an area that needs work. I developed a small computer program to check for duplicates in openings and found that most opening categorizations contain duplicate positions. For example, Schiller's opening list has duplicate openings. The same positions arise through different move orders but are named differently. ECO is far too general.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_5**: I don't think the question was about opening names.  
  > **username_2**: In some situations it's good to have those duplicate positions. If I want to study the Queen's Gambit, I don't know to go look 250 pages away every time I enter some line that could be reached from a Panov Attack at mvoe 15.  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_2 on 2021-06-17. Score: 0
  
  Maybe, but it doesn't mean much. Any version of ECO will always be an inferior, cumbersome substitute for an opening explorer.
  
  
  ---
  
  