Answers.Body: <p>It's really less about the lines, and more about the ideas. To become strong, you have to know the typical middle game plans that arise from an opening. Knowing exact sequences of moves is less important, unless a certain sequence confers a concrete benefit (like saving a tempo or preventing counter play).</p>
  
  <p>I wouldn't say that a player's "opening book" is important... it's their knowledge of positions and what plans and ideas to use in these positions that's important. Essentially these are patterns. If you know that a certain position is good for white or black, and what white or black should do in that position, that's a big advantage.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-03-20T19:03:12.830Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2019-03-20T19:03:12.830Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: ktm5124
Body: <p>How many openings does a typical (national/international level) tournament player usually know and play?</p>
  
  <p>For instance: in a tournament, can I expect that a player will either open <code>1.d4</code> or <code>1.e4</code> consistently when they have white? And, if black plays (for instance) <code>1...e6</code>, can I expect their move 2 to be always the same? How long of an opening line will they typically follow without changes (given the opportunity)?</p>
  
  <p>Or maybe they have a single opening that they play 80% of the time, for instance, and then they change completely when they feel like doing something different?</p>
  
  <p>I am not speaking about top-level matches such as a world champion match, where many matches between the same two players are played with a lot of preparation, and I can expect them to vary a bit more.</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2018-10-09T13:35:29.967Z
Comments.Text: about what type of players you ask? there are players(even GM's) who play only one maximum two openings all their life, they now those till perfection; there are players of different type like Vasily Ivanchuk - every GM know there is no reason to prepare against him - he can play anything. This really depends on a players character and dedication to chess and will to explore it, not on the level of player.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Drako
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2018-10-09T13:47:15.573Z
Comments.Text: @Drako Thanks, that sounds like an answer! It doesn't surprise me that there are extremes in both directions, but what is the most common approach that is encountered here?
Comments.UserDisplayName: Federico Poloni
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2018-10-09T14:26:00.913Z
Comments.Text: I really think its very individually - there are no rules definitely, depending on personality you can be successful with any approach and they all will have their pros and cons; so if you play 1 opening all your life at some point your risk to seriously fail in the opening is close to 0, but at same time on serious level your "risk" to get some serious opening advantage is also close to 0, because all opponents are perfectly prepared. But if you try to learn many - even genius like Ivanchuk sometimes fails in opening miserably; because you can't know everything in all of them.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Drako
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2018-10-09T14:26:07.023Z
Comments.Text: I believe most players consistently open either with 1.d4 or 1.e4, also because both lead to very different play and normally only one of both styles suits you. The same goes for Black’s first move.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Tommiie
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-03-20T19:42:33.227Z
Comments.Text: I like this question. I have wondered the same thing, though to answer authoritatively would want some analysis, would it not? That respectable openings I cannot play should exist has always bothered *me,* but this is a peculiarity of my personality. You are right. Many players specialize and do well by specializing, but how many? I wonder.
Comments.UserDisplayName: thb
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-03-20T19:50:52.127Z
Comments.Text: @Drako Of curiosity, what's your repertoire? Or do you too play anything, as Ivanchuk does?
Comments.UserDisplayName: thb
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-03-20T20:04:22.520Z
Comments.Text: Yasser Seirawan gave one of those talks, video online somewhere, at the St. Louis Chess Club, about openings he played as a teenager. Not only did he nearly always play the English 1. c4 but, as White, almost always played the same variation of that opening if he could, including b4 when possible. "Here comes Seirawan c4 b4," opponents would say when he entered the tournament hall. Later in life he added some 1. d4 lines but if you read his books for beginners, he talks a lot about *space* and the virtues of *pushing pawns* during the middlegame, which is not usually how a 1. e4 player talks.
Comments.UserDisplayName: thb
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-03-21T07:10:55.040Z
Comments.Text: @thb - I'm typically Ivanchuck type player - you don't prepare against me because I quite often decide what to play sitting at the board while my clock already ticking and I can play anything I have played even a4 and h4 as first moves in serious championships :D
Comments.UserDisplayName: Drako
Tags: <opening><tournament>
Title: How big is the "opening book" of a typical tournament player
ThreadText: # How big is the "opening book" of a typical tournament player
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2018-10-09)
  
  How many openings does a typical (national/international level) tournament player usually know and play?
  
  For instance: in a tournament, can I expect that a player will either open `1.d4` or `1.e4` consistently when they have white? And, if black plays (for instance) `1...e6`, can I expect their move 2 to be always the same? How long of an opening line will they typically follow without changes (given the opportunity)?
  
  Or maybe they have a single opening that they play 80% of the time, for instance, and then they change completely when they feel like doing something different?
  
  I am not speaking about top-level matches such as a world champion match, where many matches between the same two players are played with a lot of preparation, and I can expect them to vary a bit more.
  
  **Tags:** opening, tournament
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: about what type of players you ask? there are players(even GM's) who play only one maximum two openings all their life, they now those till perfection; there are players of different type like Vasily Ivanchuk - every GM know there is no reason to prepare against him - he can play anything. This really depends on a players character and dedication to chess and will to explore it, not on the level of player.  
  > **username_0**: @username_1 Thanks, that sounds like an answer! It doesn't surprise me that there are extremes in both directions, but what is the most common approach that is encountered here?  
  > **username_1**: I really think its very individually - there are no rules definitely, depending on personality you can be successful with any approach and they all will have their pros and cons; so if you play 1 opening all your life at some point your risk to seriously fail in the opening is close to 0, but at same time on serious level your "risk" to get some serious opening advantage is also close to 0, because all opponents are perfectly prepared. But if you try to learn many - even genius like Ivanchuk sometimes fails in opening miserably; because you can't know everything in all of them.  
  > **username_2**: I believe most players consistently open either with 1.d4 or 1.e4, also because both lead to very different play and normally only one of both styles suits you. The same goes for Black’s first move.  
  > **username_3**: I like this question. I have wondered the same thing, though to answer authoritatively would want some analysis, would it not? That respectable openings I cannot play should exist has always bothered *me,* but this is a peculiarity of my personality. You are right. Many players specialize and do well by specializing, but how many? I wonder.  
  > **username_3**: @username_1 Of curiosity, what's your repertoire? Or do you too play anything, as Ivanchuk does?  
  > **username_3**: Yasser Seirawan gave one of those talks, video online somewhere, at the St. Louis Chess Club, about openings he played as a teenager. Not only did he nearly always play the English 1. c4 but, as White, almost always played the same variation of that opening if he could, including b4 when possible. "Here comes Seirawan c4 b4," opponents would say when he entered the tournament hall. Later in life he added some 1. d4 lines but if you read his books for beginners, he talks a lot about *space* and the virtues of *pushing pawns* during the middlegame, which is not usually how a 1. e4 player talks.  
  > **username_1**: @username_3 - I'm typically Ivanchuck type player - you don't prepare against me because I quite often decide what to play sitting at the board while my clock already ticking and I can play anything I have played even a4 and h4 as first moves in serious championships :D  
  
  ---
  
  ## 1 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_4 on 2019-03-20. Score: 2
  
  It's really less about the lines, and more about the ideas. To become strong, you have to know the typical middle game plans that arise from an opening. Knowing exact sequences of moves is less important, unless a certain sequence confers a concrete benefit (like saving a tempo or preventing counter play).
  
  I wouldn't say that a player's "opening book" is important... it's their knowledge of positions and what plans and ideas to use in these positions that's important. Essentially these are patterns. If you know that a certain position is good for white or black, and what white or black should do in that position, that's a big advantage.
  
  
  ---
  
  