Something I really enjoy about these videos is the sense of positivity about the position. Chess can be pretty stressful if you feel like you're one thoughtless move away from throwing it all away. When I watch these videos, I always appreciate when you restate that "We have a good position" or similar sentiments. It puts me at ease compared to other GMs who keep saying that they "blundered" or "misplayed this" or "shouldn't have allowed that".
watch his streams, most of it is him calling himself an idiot for 20 seconds straight or saying he's playing like shit constantly while he still crushes.
He's playing against people that are 1000+ points lower-rated than him; of course he'll have a good position the vast majority of the time. The GMs you are thinking of only say those things when they play against their peers and the positions they get aren't always good, and Danya is actually no exception in that regard.
@@maxkho00 I feel like you’re missing my point here. I’m talking about these videos in particular. They teach a certain approach to chess and part of that approach is to look at what your position has to offer in a positive light.
@@essaysandmore And I feel like you're missing my point. What I'm saying is that a large part of the reason that you think Danya has this approach is that he simply has good positions an overwhelming majority of the time. Watch him play against cheaters, and you will see that he is actually just being objective and will say that his position is bad if it actually is. If you want someone with an actually optimistic approach to chess, watch Eric Rosen.
@@essaysandmoreyou see old games described with much more honorific words, like Polgar's jubilant knight, Fischer's octopus knight, this bishop being made of stone, that bishop expressing the pin. I guess it's cause they knew the outcome of the capabilities already, which is a similar theme in videos like these, but yeah, I fuckin love the exuberance of pieces. Ol kingcrusher had some fine phrases like that back in the day, and sammychess' vocab is pretty solid these days in that regard as well.
This is a small anecdote for anyone interested. I just play a game with the exact position and move order as 29:06 but I did not know the continuation. I naively played e5 instead of d5 and quickly got a much worse position - it felt right to strike the centre but I just didn't know the right way to go about it. After the game I had foggy memory that you covered this position at some point and knew that if I search through through this playlist I was sure to find it so that I could get some perspective from Daniel. And if you are reading it then you know I did indeed find it. I find these opening themed speedruns very helpful for learning so a thanks to Daniel that you have helped to improve at least one persons play ;)
Not half a mil, you deserve 10x that amount at least Danya with the amount of instructive content you have put out, all for free! Thank you so much for being the chess teacher we all need but don't deserve!
Danya, I used to have a really big weakness when visualising lines, but watching every video you put out, seeing you calculate out longer sequences I suddenly realised today that I have a lot less trouble following along. I believe you are the best chess teacher on the internet, and I recommend your videos to everyone looking to improve. Keep doing what you're doing, I'm sure many people like myself are inspired by your hard work and dedication to teaching us this game :)
Anyone who plays chess should know this is basically the best online lesson chess channel there is. So well explained, makes it sounds so easy and simple
Understanding opening theory helps you I think in two ways. First of all it shows you the kind of thinking that goes into good chess play in general, and gets you used to the considerations if you actually understand the opening. Second of all it helps you even if your opponent has no idea about theory because you are able to evaluate positions based on comparisons to actual openings.
Just wanted to let you know how much the speed run has influenced and inspired my repertoire. Went out and got the Wesley So e4 course with video and my Wesley impression has skyrocketed to native Filipino ESL levels. Thanks so much for the inspiration. Working on Ivanchuk theory next
Hey Daniel, you should do a series where you face the highest level of Stockfish using various openings. Then analyze the game afterwards, explaining the ideas that Stockfish and you were trying to implement. I think it would be really fun and fascinating to watch Stockfish play against a grandmaster and then having a grandmaster who's also a great teacher like yourself explain all the ideas. Especially since some of the ideas Stockfish comes up with are completely counter-intuitive and can go against all basic principles. It could be a great learning experience for you and us and who knows, you might even win a game!
Quite draining for him to make that since he would need to calculate a LOT to even last reasonable amount of moves and it would be very difficult to explain all the or even reasonable portion of calculations he had to us, wonder what danya thinks about this idea
@@justarandomanimegirlpassin5341 Maybe that's why I never see GM's with a series that faces Stockfish. I just really want to see a GM face Stockfish, since it's always so fascinating watching GM's duke it out with the best chess engine. I'm always used to seeing GM's sweeping casuals and masters like they John Wick lol I just think it would be an interesting change of pace and a great learning experience.
Response rationale so far: a) Very difficult b) Would not win I'm not spotting a good reason to avoid doing this so far. The objective is to learn, isn't it?
GM Daniel I love your coaching style! So refreshing to get a sound, logical, honest & proven advice to improve at chess from you, that means studying & analysis & playing & not chasing quick & weaker ways to improve by not studying chess. Many thanks for your fine coaching & playing & best wishes ;-)
I'm utterly convinced that memorizing positions and moves exercises some of the same gray matter needed for calculation, to the point where studying theory aids in learning to calculate more deeply and accurately.
I don't think its the gray matter you stimulate, but the pattern recognition and your knowledge that allows you to search and look much faster. So you need les capacities to memorize things because they are stored better in your brain. It is like having an abacus (to outsource your memory) instead of needing to memorize those numbers.
@@Rithmy that's a didtinction without a difference. The learning you're describing is embodied physically in the brain matter, which I referred to colloquially for amusement as "gray matter".
It definitely helped me. I've gone from 1000 to 1200 in the couple months since I started looking at theory. I think it's partly that it helps you build pattern recognition and see what your mid/late game targets should be more easily, but also, if you're 6 moves into a line you know, and your opponent deviated from theory on move 4, there's a good chance you have a better position and more opportunities for tactics. So it helps you calculate tactics, but it also helps set up a target rich environment.
@@tolkienfan1972 Actually there is are many very big differences. Learning does not only happen on a physical basis. How you leanr things and how you categorize and connect things is extremly important.
Next level didactic. Usually people only want to see gambits and crazy lines for blitz, this he's so good. Specially when he talks about the lore of openings too.
Internets number one chess intructor! Thank you Danya for all your hard work. You’ve made learning chess so enjoyable for me and in the year since joining this channel went from 1200-1800 just from watching your videos and understanding your thought process
Awesome video! I have been wanting to understand the Accelerated Dragon more and this was super instructional. I really appreciate you pausing at opportune times and allowing time to find moves with a bit of guidance.
Loved your 'opening' monolog here Danya. Just because a chess youtuber says you should or shouldn't do something is not the end all be all. Every chess player is different and should adapt themselves to the play in which most benefits them, and they most enjoy. Not EVERY single player needs to have the goal of reaching GM level. I feel like people who are relatively new to the chess community believe that they should just play the GM lines and openings, and that restricts soooo many people from enjoying the GAME of chess. Play whatever you want to play folks! Just have fun!!
I'm not an expert (not yet but will be) at chess however I've read and collected chess books since 1972. Even wrote a chess column for the Kansas City Star in 1974. And of course in over 50 years I've checked out instructors like Fischer, Spassky, and many others. My point is that DN is unreal great in my opinion. He's the best commentator I've ever heard period. DN's commentary of the Hikaru vs Kasparov game was incredibly instructive but what makes Naroditsky a genius is his talent for getting inside the head of folks like Kasparov and articulating their thought processes! I'm looking forward to reaching expert and beyond very quickly now.
As a 1800-2000 ish player, who has always loved learning opening theory, I’ve never understood the hate on teaching it to those who want to improve. Of course, players need to study their endgames and improve their middlegame senses (where I myself might lack), but I feel like learning openings in your 1000s gives you opportunities to reach positions that allow you to improve your technique
@@MrSupernova111 except how do you study any of that? You can pull up an opening line to learn theory, you can’t do the same for positional understanding
@@thebcwonder4850 . There are plenty of books on positional motifs and strategic ideas. Look up "best chess books" on youtube and you will get countless videos talking about various books from which you can choose from. I would also add that people looking to learn chess should also study pawn play/pawn structure. Combined with mating patterns, endgame theory/technique, calculation, and (of course) opening knowledge, there is no limit to how good someone can get at chess. If you don't like reading books then you can hire a coach but a good coach, especially a titled one, doesn't come cheap.
It’s key that lower level players first learn openings that aren’t heavily contingent on their opponents’ responses. This way they can drill their chosen openings again and again, and once they have the more systematic openings memorized, they can start to identify similarities in more advanced/unusual openings. They will learn what general concepts and setups they are comfortable with, how to pursue them, and won’t become as flustered when their opponents play something they aren’t anticipating. So yes, tactics and endgame study are important, but there is no way of players reaching those points if they do not know how to properly set up their pieces first.
The problem with theory is that at the under 1500 level, lots of players quickly veer off of theory. Now your study time is basically useless. Whereas at ~1500, the end game and middle game are both weak enough to develop meaningfully with good study. It's hard to duck middle game study. But, I do think that Danya is correct that opening study can provide fruitful advantage. If you don't end up in bad middle game positions you have to dig yourself out of, then it's pretty great also.
Thanks for the intro bit, Danya! I'm far from as experienced as you masters that make such wonderful TH-cam content, but my experience is that it really doesn't matter all that much which specific openings you pick as long as it either is reputable at a high level or (like the Stafford) has so many tricks and intricacies that learning the opening gives you a huge advantage over people who only know one or two lines. Just pick a solid repertoire and learn it, ignore what other people say about your opening unless you can incorporate some lines they know. Knowing the theory *at all* puts you above most of the people you'll face at your level, and most openings are pretty decent at a low- to mid-level.
Lovely bit of commentary 8 minutes in where Danya spends a minute or doing his best Hikaru impression: "If this then this, this, this, this... actually let's just castle". Great video as ever though, Danya, you have a special talent for teaching chess.
i was like 800-900 for a long time and just memorizing a couple of the moves of the main line rocketed me to 1200 almost instantly. i feel like at 800 i was stuck in this purgatory where i was just doing random stuff in the opening and i would just randomly lose before i even got to really start playing the game. now i can make it to a midgame where i'm not already down bad and get to actually play the game, it's way more fun
Often played the opening in the past as blak. Currently a bit rusty seeing I am no longer a club player. When looking up the opening to regain some knowledge I came across your video on the opening. You really have a refreshing way of showing in a “What-happens-if” manner. Have now joined your channel to learn more…. Thanks
Another great video! You are brengen so much joy and knowledge into the chess community. I love watching your videos and I’ve improved a lot from it. Especially the endgame course (and im only three videos in).
Dear GM Naroditsky, thankyou so much. Really enjoyed this, and very grateful for this expert commentary. I will continue to watch and enjoy the learning process. best wishes
I would like to hear some more high level descriptions of dragon / accel dragon / hyper accel dragon, how they’re different, what the pros and cons are, why you chose the accelerated over the other two as your recommendation
I love the opening of the English, Indian King, Defense and Sicilian, and your explanation is wonderful. I want advice about what you mentioned earlier
personally i absolutely love studying theory and openings, almost more than playing chess. ive spent well over 100 hours studying in the najdorf alone at 1500, and even though i dont see it all the time i love the studying and learned so much from it that can be applied generally
I totally agree on the learning theory part. I started playing at a chess club last year and managed to beat a 2200 OTB in classical, this year I beat another 2200 and a 2150 aswell and drew against an IM. I don't consistently do this ofcourse. The problem I notice is that I encounter new openings for me at sometimes even move 1, while my opponents know theory for at least 10 moves which gives them a big time advantage and for the first moves they'll pretty much play like a computer unless you go out of their prep while you have to figure out everything in an opening that is totally new to you. That's why a 2200 is just as hard to beat for me as a 1900. When I beat those 2200s I went out of their prep and it was an equal game.
Learning openings helped me improve immensely. At first it was just memorization, but once I started getting more games under my belt, each opening has given me different ideas to use even when I’m completely out of theory. Do it first, and then you will come to better understand it.
The good thing about danya is he really wants us to get better. He isn‘t telling us no bullshit and coming straight to the point. If you want to get better you have to learn theory. I‘m at 1100 right now and really feel like to get an advantage and reach my goals of 1500 and 2000 i have to memorize some main lines of my favourite openings.
I just got 2200 online rating today. My 1000-1800 journey was seriously not that hard with self study and random youtube videos/ chess books, but cracking 2000 has always been such a challenge till I started binging Danya! He truly has helped me with so much and he gave me much insight on things that I never would've been aware if not for all his speedrun videos and the puzzle videos. I really think this shouldn't be free not gonna lie but ayyy not gonna complain. I hope to see more educational stuff from you in the future. Keep doing what you're doing :D ALSO Please publish (another) book! It would be very cool
@@bartholomewtheiiijr.386 One that really helped me up my game is The complete manual of positional chess. There's two volumes of it and both are really really good.
My thoughts have always been, is that if you aren't expected to know the Grunfeld (or comparable complex opening) at your level because it's too complex, wouldn't it also mean that neither would your opponent? Sure your opponent could memorize an obscure line but as a Grunfeld player myself the vast majority of people at intermediate and above just play into the typical Exchange Variation or occasionally some sort of Russian System. Your opponent isn't going into some obscure 20 move deep line to crush you, so why is it any different then playing an opening like the Italian or Ruy Lopez that has immense theory but is still recommended to intermediate and above players. The Grunfeld may be very theoretical but if you study the main continuations and ideas, it's completely viable at intermediate as long as you learn as you go and look at the engine after games that went into territory that you didn't know.
Exactly! You only have to know a bit more theory than the average opponent at your level, so it doesn't matter that the Grunfeld is so theoretical unless you're very very high rated. Picking a reputable, complex opening and deepening your understanding a little bit after every game is part of what makes chess a beautiful, lifelong game. Plus, in my experience the Grunfeld is so rare at low-intermediate levels (I climbed from 1200 to 1500 this year) that on top of being solid and reputable it also counts as a surprise weapon. I play d4 c4 with white and I see Englunds, Baltics, and Marshalls pretty much daily but I'll go WEEKS between meeting another Grunfeld player. Those people could all be playing a tricky, tactical surprise opening that's actually good, if they gave the Grunfeld a shot!
As a 1300 rapid player thats been playing for like two years im at that point of crossing from beginner to intermediate and I actually like studying theory. The problem I have is at my level we are out of it in most games by like move 5 and then it feels like all the study was for nothing. And I know if my opponents didnt play theory it means the played a less optimal move, but I cant see how to capitalize on that most of the time. What I feel like would be really helpful at my level is a lesson on how to punish non-theory plays in the opening that are not obvious blunders.
Hi Daniel, great video again. You often want to get double bishop as an advantage which I get as a rule, but in reality it's often hard to utilize this little advantage. Have you thought about making a video just about that? I feel like it would be really nice. Have a good one!
As someone who’s been playing d4 for the last year and currently around 1400 USCF, I’ve actually found that the Grunfeld at my level puts a lot more onus on white to understand the plans. I’ve both won and lost OTB games in it where even if you have a perfectly fine position everything LOOKS scary and you have to calculate absolutely EVERYTHING, especially since you get it a lot fewer games than other openings. Meanwhile the player playing black I feel has a lot of thematic ideas they can throw at you in different combinations to test you, and if you mess up then they can convert their advantage pretty quickly. I’ve definitely considered taking it up from the black side for all these reasons.
Lol. I also saw the reddit post. Seeing how you read the post, I think you are reading the comments here as well. ;) Anyway, don't worry about it. I didn't really give the post a lot of thought, since I trust you. It is probably the same for a lot of your viewers. The Naroditsky club will make the grunfeld a fearsome opening as black, even at the intermediate level.
at 31:10 white could continue the forced tactical sequence 16.B-c5 counter attacking the blacks kings rook. I don't think that black wins the exchange but he can get a slight advantage according MCO. There was a game between Fritz 2-Kasparov that continued with 16...Bxd3 17.Bxf8 Bxf1 18.Bxg7 Bxg2 19.R-g1 Kxg7 20.Rxg2 Rb8 and according to MCO 15 edition this is slightly better for Black. Although I am not sure how an amateur like myself could prove it.
Yes, I agree: playing the mainline Sicilian is the best way to learn the arts of attack and defense. Of course, for casual and amateur players there is so much theory that the strong temptation is to learn a cute sideline. For me, that diversion was the Wing Gambit (1. e4, c5; 2. b4). And, as my buddies improved and climbed the ladder, I stayed stuck in one place (until I learned to play the Najdorf). I still derive pleasure playing chess, but I would have been a much better player if hadn't been so afraid of the Sicilian Defense.
@@marcofrey2903 Some players are so intimidated by openings like the Sicilian Defense that they learn sidelines, like the Wing Gambit, to avoid the main lines. Today, the c3, or Alapin Sicilian has independent popularity, but for me it was another sideline learned to avoid mainlines like say the Richter-Rauzer or Yugoslav attacks. If you haven't got that problem, well bully for you! For me it was a problem and it took several years to correct.
But your comment about the Nadjorf threw me off because that's for black. But so now you play into the Open Sicilian lines as White and the Nadjorf as black (if those pesky anti-sicilian players don't stop ya)? I hear you. I play the Petrov as black and the Smith Morra against the Sicilian but I'm only 1700 so it's fine for now. I have been thinking it's about time to at least get acquainted with the open lines and perhaps learn the Accelerated Dragoon as my play-to-win line as black.@@jamesduggan7200
@@marcofrey2903 Of course, if you're having fun playing chess continue that way. 1700 is (or used to be - I can't be sure anymore) an excellent rating for finding friendly games. The stronger players - masters and experts - are part of a smaller pool of players and those there tend to treat the game seriously, which isn't always what you want. However, if you want to study opening theory I think it's a good idea to learn some of the mainline Sicilians, like the Najdorf and the Dragon (d6 - Sicilians); and the Taimanov and Shevesnikov (e6 - Sicilians). An old friend of mine learned a lot about chess while studying the Schevinigan (e6 & d6). Enjoy!
Hi Daniel! I Thank-you for your videos! I have learnt so much from them! Recently I played on my second ever otb tournament, and it was the first time I decided to try my best. In my games, as I was making my recap videos and analyzing with my opponents, I came to conclusion that I had a solid opening thanks to the videos you have uploaded, but in most cases, I'll make a huge 1 move blunder that gives away a huge advantage and I will lose. After this speed run series, will you make more of your middle game videos and/or adjusting to otb after playing only online chess. Thank you!!
Even in the Maroczy Bind, black has a new line that scores quite well, playing a5 and a4, attacking the base of whites pawn chain on the queenside instead of the head of the pawn chain.
Me as intermediary player: I so agree with you Dany!!! And by studying I mean mainly know what will be the plans. Build a repertoire according to your streangth. I played the Grunfeld and it is at our level that the opponent make mistakes!
Those (hypothetical) mates with the pawn and/or queen promotion are so unncessary harsh. I like it. Doing something in a game shows complete domination. Yeah, both my queens are hanging, but you can take neither.
at 13:23, when we attack the pawn and the bishop with E5 pawn, why cant white just drop his bishop back one square. -- isnt it the case that if we take with pawn then white only goes down 2 pawns? ie a better outcome than the best outcome danya calculated?
I am pretty sure you had a check mate in 3 at 22:20 just by chasing the king with your queen since the rock and pawn of your opponent were in the way of the king
Hi Danya, Hikaru said the grunfeld is not suitable for the intermediate level is that the concepts are not obvious and giving up the center is generally not easy to handle
this is exactly how my elo rating got so high in bullet. People often do robotic premoves in bullet and you can catch some people off guard with the fianchetto bishop
I thought the top response in that Reddit thread was a great rundown of why the Grunfeld was a poor option for a 1500. Obviously Danya knows more then I do, but it was a great counterpoint.
As someone who was around 1200 for while and before getting a coach - I was almost unable to learn openings from many sources. I simply did not understand what the point of the moves was, I was around 1600 when I first started to feel that I understood what the threats in the position really were and what certain moves did. I think it's essential that the first couple of moves are clear, but it's really hard to learn openings without the supporting knowledge because the opponents at 1200 will play an off the line move at move 5 - it's probably a really bad move, but if you don't understand why it's bad - it's hard to use it. It's very hard to even look at master games / stockfish because not all moves threaten to win material - it's important to know positional advantages and how those positional advantages turn into wins, only then can the opening really be understood. I think that's one of the things that happens once you reach an extremely high level at something - it becomes almost unfathomable that some things are not understood by others. For you it's super basic, but for others they are not even seeing it not to even speak of understanding it in a deep way.
@Danya, how do you save your dark squared bishop if white plays an early Bh6, after creating a battery with Qd2? That hits me in Sicicilan and KID setups where you have the same king side structure...
About Levy and Hikaru saying the Gruenfeld is garbage, based on the video, some precisions: - Levy always have reservations on very theoretical openings, but voted for classified it as "maybe not", not garbage. - Hikaru seems to have really bad souvenirs about the Gruenfeld a be traumatised. He voted garbage and had the last word. Everyone has their bias and they at least have been clear about it.
In the past year or two Anand played a young Indian GM (Pragg?) with this opening as black and the dark square bishop was traded early, but Anand won in convincing manner in the end game. Hopefully Danya can annotate that game as well.
18:37 if he played Qa5 here instead of Qc5, he would have a 99.5 accuracy, which is insane. He got a 95.9 this game though, which is higher than 99% of my games.
I would like to suggest my own way of choosing openings, I also thought that I should avoid some openings because it's a lot of theory but it's not always like that. I decided to pick my openings and lines based on me being able to control how the opening continues, for example: sicilian, Grand Prix; caro-kann, Fantasy, French, KIA. Or from different move orders with d4: Queen's Gambit declined, Nf3 because I play the Catalan; I play d4 e6 c4 g3 to avoid some Queen's indian lines and other unique lines against other stuff. But with black is bit more difficult, basically you have to respond to the oponent but it doesn't have to be complicated and just learn a little at a time.
Your teaching style is such a universal gift, Mr Danya, so good
Danya at 7:51: "give me 30 seconds in silence". Danya at 7:53: *LOUD TALKING*. His own worst enemy.
In all actuality, he only needed those two seconds. He's WAY ahead of all of us, A.B.
@@ems3832nope. he probably had the best move in mind but was second-guessing himself during the entirety of the “30 second think”
Something I really enjoy about these videos is the sense of positivity about the position. Chess can be pretty stressful if you feel like you're one thoughtless move away from throwing it all away. When I watch these videos, I always appreciate when you restate that "We have a good position" or similar sentiments. It puts me at ease compared to other GMs who keep saying that they "blundered" or "misplayed this" or "shouldn't have allowed that".
watch his streams, most of it is him calling himself an idiot for 20 seconds straight or saying he's playing like shit constantly while he still crushes.
He's playing against people that are 1000+ points lower-rated than him; of course he'll have a good position the vast majority of the time. The GMs you are thinking of only say those things when they play against their peers and the positions they get aren't always good, and Danya is actually no exception in that regard.
@@maxkho00 I feel like you’re missing my point here. I’m talking about these videos in particular. They teach a certain approach to chess and part of that approach is to look at what your position has to offer in a positive light.
@@essaysandmore And I feel like you're missing my point. What I'm saying is that a large part of the reason that you think Danya has this approach is that he simply has good positions an overwhelming majority of the time. Watch him play against cheaters, and you will see that he is actually just being objective and will say that his position is bad if it actually is. If you want someone with an actually optimistic approach to chess, watch Eric Rosen.
@@essaysandmoreyou see old games described with much more honorific words, like Polgar's jubilant knight, Fischer's octopus knight, this bishop being made of stone, that bishop expressing the pin. I guess it's cause they knew the outcome of the capabilities already, which is a similar theme in videos like these, but yeah, I fuckin love the exuberance of pieces. Ol kingcrusher had some fine phrases like that back in the day, and sammychess' vocab is pretty solid these days in that regard as well.
This is a small anecdote for anyone interested. I just play a game with the exact position and move order as 29:06 but I did not know the continuation. I naively played e5 instead of d5 and quickly got a much worse position - it felt right to strike the centre but I just didn't know the right way to go about it. After the game I had foggy memory that you covered this position at some point and knew that if I search through through this playlist I was sure to find it so that I could get some perspective from Daniel. And if you are reading it then you know I did indeed find it. I find these opening themed speedruns very helpful for learning so a thanks to Daniel that you have helped to improve at least one persons play ;)
Not half a mil, you deserve 10x that amount at least Danya with the amount of instructive content you have put out, all for free! Thank you so much for being the chess teacher we all need but don't deserve!
Danya, I used to have a really big weakness when visualising lines, but watching every video you put out, seeing you calculate out longer sequences I suddenly realised today that I have a lot less trouble following along. I believe you are the best chess teacher on the internet, and I recommend your videos to everyone looking to improve. Keep doing what you're doing, I'm sure many people like myself are inspired by your hard work and dedication to teaching us this game :)
It's a cool feeling isn't it? I feel the same.
I don't try to force myself to calculate as many moves ahead as Danya. I just try to do 2-3 moves deep.
Anyone who plays chess should know this is basically the best online lesson chess channel there is. So well explained, makes it sounds so easy and simple
Understanding opening theory helps you I think in two ways. First of all it shows you the kind of thinking that goes into good chess play in general, and gets you used to the considerations if you actually understand the opening. Second of all it helps you even if your opponent has no idea about theory because you are able to evaluate positions based on comparisons to actual openings.
Just wanted to let you know how much the speed run has influenced and inspired my repertoire. Went out and got the Wesley So e4 course with video and my Wesley impression has skyrocketed to native Filipino ESL levels. Thanks so much for the inspiration. Working on Ivanchuk theory next
Hey Daniel, you should do a series where you face the highest level of Stockfish using various openings. Then analyze the game afterwards, explaining the ideas that Stockfish and you were trying to implement. I think it would be really fun and fascinating to watch Stockfish play against a grandmaster and then having a grandmaster who's also a great teacher like yourself explain all the ideas. Especially since some of the ideas Stockfish comes up with are completely counter-intuitive and can go against all basic principles. It could be a great learning experience for you and us and who knows, you might even win a game!
Quite draining for him to make that since he would need to calculate a LOT to even last reasonable amount of moves and it would be very difficult to explain all the or even reasonable portion of calculations he had to us, wonder what danya thinks about this idea
He will not win a game, nobody can ever come close to beating an engine nowadays
No, it will take a lot of effort just to draw a game lol
@@justarandomanimegirlpassin5341 Maybe that's why I never see GM's with a series that faces Stockfish. I just really want to see a GM face Stockfish, since it's always so fascinating watching GM's duke it out with the best chess engine. I'm always used to seeing GM's sweeping casuals and masters like they John Wick lol I just think it would be an interesting change of pace and a great learning experience.
Response rationale so far:
a) Very difficult
b) Would not win
I'm not spotting a good reason to avoid doing this so far. The objective is to learn, isn't it?
GM Daniel I love your coaching style! So refreshing to get a sound, logical, honest & proven advice to improve at chess from you, that means studying & analysis & playing & not chasing quick & weaker ways to improve by not studying chess. Many thanks for your fine coaching & playing & best wishes ;-)
I'm utterly convinced that memorizing positions and moves exercises some of the same gray matter needed for calculation, to the point where studying theory aids in learning to calculate more deeply and accurately.
I don't think its the gray matter you stimulate, but the pattern recognition and your knowledge that allows you to search and look much faster. So you need les capacities to memorize things because they are stored better in your brain. It is like having an abacus (to outsource your memory) instead of needing to memorize those numbers.
@@Rithmy that's a didtinction without a difference. The learning you're describing is embodied physically in the brain matter, which I referred to colloquially for amusement as "gray matter".
It definitely helped me. I've gone from 1000 to 1200 in the couple months since I started looking at theory. I think it's partly that it helps you build pattern recognition and see what your mid/late game targets should be more easily, but also, if you're 6 moves into a line you know, and your opponent deviated from theory on move 4, there's a good chance you have a better position and more opportunities for tactics. So it helps you calculate tactics, but it also helps set up a target rich environment.
@@tolkienfan1972
Actually there is are many very big differences. Learning does not only happen on a physical basis. How you leanr things and how you categorize and connect things is extremly important.
@@Rithmy it's all embodied in physical changes
Danya makes learning openings, and chess in general, fun instead of boring
Kinda have to agree lol
If you think you can evade the 'boring' stuff on your way to mastery in any endeavour in life, you're just joking.
Next level didactic. Usually people only want to see gambits and crazy lines for blitz, this he's so good. Specially when he talks about the lore of openings too.
@@musical_lolu4811 Still, much easier to learn stuff in a fun way rather than in a boring way
@@musical_lolu4811 not everyone wants to become a master lol i just want to be better at chess, so im way happier learning this way
Internets number one chess intructor! Thank you Danya for all your hard work. You’ve made learning chess so enjoyable for me and in the year since joining this channel went from 1200-1800 just from watching your videos and understanding your thought process
Thanks!
Awesome video! I have been wanting to understand the Accelerated Dragon more and this was super instructional. I really appreciate you pausing at opportune times and allowing time to find moves with a bit of guidance.
I recently picked up the Sicilian myself and these videos are a wealth of knowledge to digest. I can't thank you enough for it. Amazing explanations!
Loved your 'opening' monolog here Danya. Just because a chess youtuber says you should or shouldn't do something is not the end all be all. Every chess player is different and should adapt themselves to the play in which most benefits them, and they most enjoy. Not EVERY single player needs to have the goal of reaching GM level. I feel like people who are relatively new to the chess community believe that they should just play the GM lines and openings, and that restricts soooo many people from enjoying the GAME of chess. Play whatever you want to play folks! Just have fun!!
24:00 That's a beautiful one, both queens attacked, but can't take both at the same time :)
I'm not an expert (not yet but will be) at chess however I've read and collected chess books since 1972. Even wrote a chess column for the Kansas City Star in 1974.
And of course in over 50 years I've checked out instructors like Fischer, Spassky, and many others. My point is that DN is unreal great in my opinion.
He's the best commentator I've ever heard period. DN's commentary of the Hikaru vs Kasparov game was incredibly instructive but what makes Naroditsky a genius is his talent for getting inside the head of folks like Kasparov and articulating their thought processes!
I'm looking forward to reaching expert and beyond very quickly now.
Danke!
As a 1800-2000 ish player, who has always loved learning opening theory, I’ve never understood the hate on teaching it to those who want to improve. Of course, players need to study their endgames and improve their middlegame senses (where I myself might lack), but I feel like learning openings in your 1000s gives you opportunities to reach positions that allow you to improve your technique
great analysis!
The problem is that beginners get obsessed with openings and ignore calculation, endgames, and positional knowledge which are arguably more important.
@@MrSupernova111 except how do you study any of that? You can pull up an opening line to learn theory, you can’t do the same for positional understanding
@@thebcwonder4850 . There are plenty of books on positional motifs and strategic ideas. Look up "best chess books" on youtube and you will get countless videos talking about various books from which you can choose from. I would also add that people looking to learn chess should also study pawn play/pawn structure. Combined with mating patterns, endgame theory/technique, calculation, and (of course) opening knowledge, there is no limit to how good someone can get at chess. If you don't like reading books then you can hire a coach but a good coach, especially a titled one, doesn't come cheap.
It’s key that lower level players first learn openings that aren’t heavily contingent on their opponents’ responses. This way they can drill their chosen openings again and again, and once they have the more systematic openings memorized, they can start to identify similarities in more advanced/unusual openings. They will learn what general concepts and setups they are comfortable with, how to pursue them, and won’t become as flustered when their opponents play something they aren’t anticipating. So yes, tactics and endgame study are important, but there is no way of players reaching those points if they do not know how to properly set up their pieces first.
Me at 2000+ CC, hearing Danya emphasize the importance of studying openings, knowing full well I didn’t study all that much theory:
*Intense sweating*
Be happy that improvement could possibly be that simple!
The problem with theory is that at the under 1500 level, lots of players quickly veer off of theory. Now your study time is basically useless. Whereas at ~1500, the end game and middle game are both weak enough to develop meaningfully with good study. It's hard to duck middle game study.
But, I do think that Danya is correct that opening study can provide fruitful advantage. If you don't end up in bad middle game positions you have to dig yourself out of, then it's pretty great also.
Studying theory is extremely boring, I don't understand why you'd do that as a non-professional player.
@@vladn6031 To get better at chess, obviously.
@@MedicalNemesis Why?
Thanks for the intro bit, Danya! I'm far from as experienced as you masters that make such wonderful TH-cam content, but my experience is that it really doesn't matter all that much which specific openings you pick as long as it either is reputable at a high level or (like the Stafford) has so many tricks and intricacies that learning the opening gives you a huge advantage over people who only know one or two lines. Just pick a solid repertoire and learn it, ignore what other people say about your opening unless you can incorporate some lines they know. Knowing the theory *at all* puts you above most of the people you'll face at your level, and most openings are pretty decent at a low- to mid-level.
Lovely bit of commentary 8 minutes in where Danya spends a minute or doing his best Hikaru impression: "If this then this, this, this, this... actually let's just castle". Great video as ever though, Danya, you have a special talent for teaching chess.
31:38 I thought he was gonna say "... so let me check the engine" 🤣
i was like 800-900 for a long time and just memorizing a couple of the moves of the main line rocketed me to 1200 almost instantly. i feel like at 800 i was stuck in this purgatory where i was just doing random stuff in the opening and i would just randomly lose before i even got to really start playing the game. now i can make it to a midgame where i'm not already down bad and get to actually play the game, it's way more fun
Often played the opening in the past as blak. Currently a bit rusty seeing I am no longer a club player. When looking up the opening to regain some knowledge I came across your video on the opening. You really have a refreshing way of showing in a “What-happens-if” manner. Have now joined your channel to learn more…. Thanks
You are a born teacher. One among the few. Thank you very much!!!
I have been your biggest fan man. Thanks for existing
danya, i just want to thank you so much, you are an incredibly good teacher, certainly the best and a tefiffic player!!!
Another great video! You are brengen so much joy and knowledge into the chess community. I love watching your videos and I’ve improved a lot from it.
Especially the endgame course (and im only three videos in).
These videos are solid gooold. Thanks for sharing so much knowledge!
Dear GM Naroditsky, thankyou so much. Really enjoyed this, and very grateful for this expert commentary. I will continue to watch and enjoy the learning process. best wishes
I would like to hear some more high level descriptions of dragon / accel dragon / hyper accel dragon, how they’re different, what the pros and cons are, why you chose the accelerated over the other two as your recommendation
I love the opening of the English, Indian King, Defense and Sicilian, and your explanation is wonderful. I want advice about what you mentioned earlier
as always a great instructive video, thanks for the coaching!
Nice one Danya, especially enjoyed the analysis section
personally i absolutely love studying theory and openings, almost more than playing chess. ive spent well over 100 hours studying in the najdorf alone at 1500, and even though i dont see it all the time i love the studying and learned so much from it that can be applied generally
In my opinion you are the best chess TH-camr. You will hit 1M some day. You already deserves it.
Yea, this is how I want to play chess now. You're my new favorite youtuber Dannyboi. You get a sub today.
I totally agree on the learning theory part. I started playing at a chess club last year and managed to beat a 2200 OTB in classical, this year I beat another 2200 and a 2150 aswell and drew against an IM. I don't consistently do this ofcourse. The problem I notice is that I encounter new openings for me at sometimes even move 1, while my opponents know theory for at least 10 moves which gives them a big time advantage and for the first moves they'll pretty much play like a computer unless you go out of their prep while you have to figure out everything in an opening that is totally new to you. That's why a 2200 is just as hard to beat for me as a 1900. When I beat those 2200s I went out of their prep and it was an equal game.
Great analysis! Thanks!
Learning openings helped me improve immensely. At first it was just memorization, but once I started getting more games under my belt, each opening has given me different ideas to use even when I’m completely out of theory. Do it first, and then you will come to better understand it.
This was fantastic!! Thank you!
24:01 I find to be a very cool mate. Both queens are on “defended” squares but it doesn’t matter.
Thank you for this great content! I took away a lot from this.
EXCELLENT!! as always, many thanks.
Thank you
Good Game, Great Lesson ! Thanks brother !
The good thing about danya is he really wants us to get better. He isn‘t telling us no bullshit and coming straight to the point. If you want to get better you have to learn theory. I‘m at 1100 right now and really feel like to get an advantage and reach my goals of 1500 and 2000 i have to memorize some main lines of my favourite openings.
very instructive
a study-like finish, very nice
I just got 2200 online rating today. My 1000-1800 journey was seriously not that hard with self study and random youtube videos/ chess books, but cracking 2000 has always been such a challenge till I started binging Danya! He truly has helped me with so much and he gave me much insight on things that I never would've been aware if not for all his speedrun videos and the puzzle videos. I really think this shouldn't be free not gonna lie but ayyy not gonna complain. I hope to see more educational stuff from you in the future. Keep doing what you're doing :D ALSO Please publish (another) book! It would be very cool
Could you reccomend some books that helped you?
@@bartholomewtheiiijr.386 One that really helped me up my game is The complete manual of positional chess. There's two volumes of it and both are really really good.
@@terrdapear thank you!
My thoughts have always been, is that if you aren't expected to know the Grunfeld (or comparable complex opening) at your level because it's too complex, wouldn't it also mean that neither would your opponent? Sure your opponent could memorize an obscure line but as a Grunfeld player myself the vast majority of people at intermediate and above just play into the typical Exchange Variation or occasionally some sort of Russian System. Your opponent isn't going into some obscure 20 move deep line to crush you, so why is it any different then playing an opening like the Italian or Ruy Lopez that has immense theory but is still recommended to intermediate and above players. The Grunfeld may be very theoretical but if you study the main continuations and ideas, it's completely viable at intermediate as long as you learn as you go and look at the engine after games that went into territory that you didn't know.
Exactly! You only have to know a bit more theory than the average opponent at your level, so it doesn't matter that the Grunfeld is so theoretical unless you're very very high rated. Picking a reputable, complex opening and deepening your understanding a little bit after every game is part of what makes chess a beautiful, lifelong game.
Plus, in my experience the Grunfeld is so rare at low-intermediate levels (I climbed from 1200 to 1500 this year) that on top of being solid and reputable it also counts as a surprise weapon. I play d4 c4 with white and I see Englunds, Baltics, and Marshalls pretty much daily but I'll go WEEKS between meeting another Grunfeld player. Those people could all be playing a tricky, tactical surprise opening that's actually good, if they gave the Grunfeld a shot!
beautiful teaching.
As a 1300 rapid player thats been playing for like two years im at that point of crossing from beginner to intermediate and I actually like studying theory. The problem I have is at my level we are out of it in most games by like move 5 and then it feels like all the study was for nothing. And I know if my opponents didnt play theory it means the played a less optimal move, but I cant see how to capitalize on that most of the time. What I feel like would be really helpful at my level is a lesson on how to punish non-theory plays in the opening that are not obvious blunders.
Great crash course on the accelerated!
Hi Daniel, great video again. You often want to get double bishop as an advantage which I get as a rule, but in reality it's often hard to utilize this little advantage. Have you thought about making a video just about that? I feel like it would be really nice. Have a good one!
I was having a boring night, then I got the notification for this vid. Thanks Danya!
As someone who’s been playing d4 for the last year and currently around 1400 USCF, I’ve actually found that the Grunfeld at my level puts a lot more onus on white to understand the plans. I’ve both won and lost OTB games in it where even if you have a perfectly fine position everything LOOKS scary and you have to calculate absolutely EVERYTHING, especially since you get it a lot fewer games than other openings. Meanwhile the player playing black I feel has a lot of thematic ideas they can throw at you in different combinations to test you, and if you mess up then they can convert their advantage pretty quickly. I’ve definitely considered taking it up from the black side for all these reasons.
Lol. I also saw the reddit post. Seeing how you read the post, I think you are reading the comments here as well. ;)
Anyway, don't worry about it. I didn't really give the post a lot of thought, since I trust you. It is probably the same for a lot of your viewers. The Naroditsky club will make the grunfeld a fearsome opening as black, even at the intermediate level.
I've been playing the standard dragon for several years and this really makes me consider switching
I love the sound effect on 34:40.
I will be using it every time I pin a queen.
at 31:10 white could continue the forced tactical sequence 16.B-c5 counter attacking the blacks kings rook. I don't think that black wins the exchange but he can get a slight advantage according MCO. There was a game between Fritz 2-Kasparov that continued with 16...Bxd3 17.Bxf8 Bxf1 18.Bxg7 Bxg2 19.R-g1 Kxg7 20.Rxg2 Rb8 and according to MCO 15 edition this is slightly better for Black. Although I am not sure how an amateur like myself could prove it.
Yes, I agree: playing the mainline Sicilian is the best way to learn the arts of attack and defense. Of course, for casual and amateur players there is so much theory that the strong temptation is to learn a cute sideline. For me, that diversion was the Wing Gambit (1. e4, c5; 2. b4). And, as my buddies improved and climbed the ladder, I stayed stuck in one place (until I learned to play the Najdorf). I still derive pleasure playing chess, but I would have been a much better player if hadn't been so afraid of the Sicilian Defense.
But the wing gambit is for white so what are you saying?
@@marcofrey2903 Some players are so intimidated by openings like the Sicilian Defense that they learn sidelines, like the Wing Gambit, to avoid the main lines. Today, the c3, or Alapin Sicilian has independent popularity, but for me it was another sideline learned to avoid mainlines like say the Richter-Rauzer or Yugoslav attacks. If you haven't got that problem, well bully for you! For me it was a problem and it took several years to correct.
But your comment about the Nadjorf threw me off because that's for black. But so now you play into the Open Sicilian lines as White and the Nadjorf as black (if those pesky anti-sicilian players don't stop ya)? I hear you. I play the Petrov as black and the Smith Morra against the Sicilian but I'm only 1700 so it's fine for now. I have been thinking it's about time to at least get acquainted with the open lines and perhaps learn the Accelerated Dragoon as my play-to-win line as black.@@jamesduggan7200
@@marcofrey2903 Of course, if you're having fun playing chess continue that way. 1700 is (or used to be - I can't be sure anymore) an excellent rating for finding friendly games. The stronger players - masters and experts - are part of a smaller pool of players and those there tend to treat the game seriously, which isn't always what you want. However, if you want to study opening theory I think it's a good idea to learn some of the mainline Sicilians, like the Najdorf and the Dragon (d6 - Sicilians); and the Taimanov and Shevesnikov (e6 - Sicilians). An old friend of mine learned a lot about chess while studying the Schevinigan (e6 & d6). Enjoy!
"when you're up a piece you can basically do whatever the heck you want"
you underestimate my ability to throw the game away
Hi Daniel! I Thank-you for your videos! I have learnt so much from them! Recently I played on my second ever otb tournament, and it was the first time I decided to try my best. In my games, as I was making my recap videos and analyzing with my opponents, I came to conclusion that I had a solid opening thanks to the videos you have uploaded, but in most cases, I'll make a huge 1 move blunder that gives away a huge advantage and I will lose. After this speed run series, will you make more of your middle game videos and/or adjusting to otb after playing only online chess. Thank you!!
Even in the Maroczy Bind, black has a new line that scores quite well, playing a5 and a4, attacking the base of whites pawn chain on the queenside instead of the head of the pawn chain.
23:58 I'd like to call this the "3D Checkmate": Discovered Double Dovetail Checkmate
Me as intermediary player: I so agree with you Dany!!!
And by studying I mean mainly know what will be the plans. Build a repertoire according to your streangth. I played the Grunfeld and it is at our level that the opponent make mistakes!
Those (hypothetical) mates with the pawn and/or queen promotion are so unncessary harsh. I like it. Doing something in a game shows complete domination. Yeah, both my queens are hanging, but you can take neither.
Fianchettoed bishop and knight combo. Great pattern to remember Ng4 Bh6 as black or Ng5 Bh4 as white. Brilliant.
Hell yeah brother
at 13:23, when we attack the pawn and the bishop with E5 pawn, why cant white just drop his bishop back one square. -- isnt it the case that if we take with pawn then white only goes down 2 pawns? ie a better outcome than the best outcome danya calculated?
Does anyone have a response on this ?
I am pretty sure you had a check mate in 3 at 22:20 just by chasing the king with your queen since the rock and pawn of your opponent were in the way of the king
I just wish that these speed runs will never come to an end :)
You will hit 400k in no time master danya. keep it up. very educational video.
Hi Danya, Hikaru said the grunfeld is not suitable for the intermediate level is that the concepts are not obvious and giving up the center is generally not easy to handle
8:00
My preparation in this position in
1...Ng4 2.Nxc6 bxc6 3.Bd4 Bh6 4.Qe2 e5 5.Bc5 Rb8 6.Qxg4 e6 and the position is equal
That painting goes unbelievably hard
Thanks Sir
this is exactly how my elo rating got so high in bullet. People often do robotic premoves in bullet and you can catch some people off guard with the fianchetto bishop
I love how you just get on with the chess and don't bother with all the, "look at me, I'm clever" stuff... Thanks for a real lesson
I thought the top response in that Reddit thread was a great rundown of why the Grunfeld was a poor option for a 1500. Obviously Danya knows more then I do, but it was a great counterpoint.
As someone who was around 1200 for while and before getting a coach - I was almost unable to learn openings from many sources. I simply did not understand what the point of the moves was, I was around 1600 when I first started to feel that I understood what the threats in the position really were and what certain moves did. I think it's essential that the first couple of moves are clear, but it's really hard to learn openings without the supporting knowledge because the opponents at 1200 will play an off the line move at move 5 - it's probably a really bad move, but if you don't understand why it's bad - it's hard to use it. It's very hard to even look at master games / stockfish because not all moves threaten to win material - it's important to know positional advantages and how those positional advantages turn into wins, only then can the opening really be understood. I think that's one of the things that happens once you reach an extremely high level at something - it becomes almost unfathomable that some things are not understood by others. For you it's super basic, but for others they are not even seeing it not to even speak of understanding it in a deep way.
Jees, I hope we get to see Danya suited up like in the thumbnail,
@Danya, how do you save your dark squared bishop if white plays an early Bh6, after creating a battery with Qd2? That hits me in Sicicilan and KID setups where you have the same king side structure...
Always castle on move 7, says Peter Lalic in this book about de AC/D. It seems to be a good tip.
Great great great!!!
About Levy and Hikaru saying the Gruenfeld is garbage, based on the video, some precisions:
- Levy always have reservations on very theoretical openings, but voted for classified it as "maybe not", not garbage.
- Hikaru seems to have really bad souvenirs about the Gruenfeld a be traumatised. He voted garbage and had the last word.
Everyone has their bias and they at least have been clear about it.
In the past year or two Anand played a young Indian GM (Pragg?) with this opening as black and the dark square bishop was traded early, but Anand won in convincing manner in the end game. Hopefully Danya can annotate that game as well.
28:48 difference between a dragon and an accelerated dragon
18:37 if he played Qa5 here instead of Qc5, he would have a 99.5 accuracy, which is insane. He got a 95.9 this game though, which is higher than 99% of my games.
So freaky seeing the Reddit post, commenting on it, then seeing it referenced in a vid
The position plays for itself.
I would like to suggest my own way of choosing openings, I also thought that I should avoid some openings because it's a lot of theory but it's not always like that. I decided to pick my openings and lines based on me being able to control how the opening continues, for example: sicilian, Grand Prix; caro-kann, Fantasy, French, KIA. Or from different move orders with d4: Queen's Gambit declined, Nf3 because I play the Catalan; I play d4 e6 c4 g3 to avoid some Queen's indian lines and other unique lines against other stuff. But with black is bit more difficult, basically you have to respond to the oponent but it doesn't have to be complicated and just learn a little at a time.
First episode where I know more theory than danya lol
"When you're on your own in a Sicilian, bad things tend to happen".
the world's chess teacher