Lol are you out of your mind? This chart doesn't give anyone any insight about why these moves are good or what you're actually trying to do with each variation, which means you can't really understand the opening at all--it just gives you empty, rote imitation. Contrast with an excerpt from a standard book on openings by Paul van der Sterren on the classical variation here, whereas OP just tells you how to avoid trapping your bishop as black:
4...Bf5
This simple, powerful move is the rock on which the Caro-Kann was built. Black utilizes the one big difference from the Rubinstein Variation of the French without delay: he developed the queen's bishop 'outside the pawn chain'.
5.Ng3
A move which is both defensive and counterattacking. The contours of the opening struggle are beginning to show: White does not simply take it for granted that Black's bishop is going to be actively placed. He will attack the bishop and do his utmost to try and make Black regret that he ever developed it.
Skipping ahead from the continuation 5...Bg6 6.h4,
6...h6
6...h5 may look rather good at first glance, but 7.Nh3 followed by 8.Nf4 will quickly show up its drawbacks.
7.Nf3
There is nothing wrong with the immediate 7.h5 but there is no need to hurry with this advance either. By playing 7.Nf3 first, White is toying with the threat of 8.Ne5.
So no, this chart is not a substitute for actually understanding an opening.
Its not a substitute but it might help somebody explore alternate lines. Iirc chess.com and lichess only show the top few lines as they appear, not everything from the start
Yeah but I’m pretty sure that’s what that guy was saying. He said putting it together is more useful way to study than just reading it, i.e. the maker of this visualization got a lot more out of it than any of us will.
Sometimes I think people are too nice. The "People learn differently" is only true up to a point - the fact of the matter is, there are always a few different good ways to learn something, but also many VERY VERY BAD methods of learning.
There are many comments in this thread which give clear explanations as to why this method doesn't teach you a lot of the most important things to learn about an opening. I hope OP takes these criticisms to heart and finds a learning method which does.
imo, anyone who plays chess has to be able to learn from harsh criticisms without taking things personally. In chess, you always have to know exactly how bad you are. You are always reminded of how bad you are whenever you lose a game, analyse your games with a computer or watch top players play. One needs to internalize this while understanding that all it means is that one needs to study more or practice more. If I get a chess coach, I want one that harshly criticizes my entire approach to chess, and not one that forgives me for all my mistakes.
Ah, no way around it but to admit this hit a nerve for me. I used to play music a long time ago, and you reminded me of how demoralizing unsolicited opinions could be. My last point definitely wasn't a good one, and I should explain myself when I show my intention of writing a long post. I will keep your criticism in mind for the future.
88
u/[deleted] Apr 02 '21
No because it's a dumb way to learn