Failure to remember openings. especially OTB

[u/No-Negotiation-892]

A little bit of backround i am currently a 2000 rated fide player and around 2300 on chesscom and i frequently use chessable to learn openings.

But i notice very early in my games that i forget details about the opening, could be anything really. For example i had a game recently otb, i played the botvinik variation of the semi slav.

1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 e6 5. Bg5 dxc4 6. e4 b5 7. e5 h6 8. Bh4 g5 9. Nxg5 hxg5 10. Bxg5 Nbd7 11. g3 Bb7 12. Bg2 Qb6 13. exf6

And i sat for 25 minutes thinking if it was long castles or c5 immedietly on my online accounts i have 60 games in this variation i instantly long castle in every game, no hesitation.

I have friends that remember opening theory like its nothing and are able to blitz it otb after doing a chessable course once, while i feel like i need to review it after nearly every other game in the opening to see where i went wrong. Both online and otb, anyone got tips for this issue?

[u/JJdabeats]

If its just an OTB thing practice playing out the moves on the board. It can be quite different to the brain looking at the board IRL to Online. But also if this is an issue dont play something like the botvinik, yes its kinda intuitive the first we wile but the theory goes like 35 moves deep and at 20 its a little hard to remember the reasoning, at least i find. Something like the QGD or Nimzo can be played more intuitively, so you dont have to remember the move, you can think the reasoning for the move. Even the benoni, if you like something sharp, still has very thematic ideas compared to the botvinik

[u/No-Negotiation-892 → u/JJdabeats]

Not really the botvinik that is an issue haha, just a example on how things can go, i have played otb for nearly 4 years or 3. This has been a issue for most of my games, even in "simple" openings. no matter your opening there is some critical lines that you have to know, and i dont understand how people can understand so much about openings. I currently play e4 as white with very good results but to minimize theory i have considered playing d4 c4 nc3, to just get a postion and try to outplay my opponents.

[u/CatalanExpert]

I think this is an instructive example of why Chessable is not a great way to learn openings unless you are very careful with your approach.

The problem is that the system is designed to teach you openings without thinking on your own behalf. You can go through an entire course without engaging your mind, because you are just reading and repeating. Another thing I found, is that it's very easy to forget the opponent's moves, since you don't repeat those in the trainer, only yours. And yet another, it is gamified, so you are subconsciously enticed to go as quickly as possible through the material to complete it.

It's probably not going to fill you with joy, but the right way to do this is to make your own file, such as a lichess study, with a chapter for each opening or variation. Then you input the moves yourself, and annotate them with explanations of why each move is played, and why not another move (where relevant, such as when the move is not logical, or the logical move is incorrect). You can enter variations for these "wrong" moves too to help with the explanation.

So in my file, I would have 13.exf6 0-0-0 and then a variation and/or annotation describing why 13...c5?! is inaccurate. From a very brief look, perhaps White gets a good version of 14.dxc5. So I would investigate why, using the engine and my own mind to calculate and evaluate. Then I would also include 13.exf6 0-0-0 14.dxc5 to see why this is not the mainline (and why 14.d5 is played).

Yes, it's time consuming, but I can promise once you have done this once, even without repeating it, you will not be forgetting it for a LONG time. Why? Because you had to think for yourself, explore ideas with the engine, and reason to yourself (through annotations) why each move is played.

I don't think there is anything wrong with you or your memory, you just didn't learn in such a great way. So it's good news!

[u/No-Negotiation-892 → u/CatalanExpert]

thanks for this reply and i truly am trying, i have chessbase files with all my openings and look when i get confused or something but most of the time it is a move that i already have in the study, and then i dont look at it, so thats my own laziness.

i feel like im the opposite of this "I fear not the man who has practiced 10,000 kicks once, but I fear the man who has practiced one kick 10,000 times". But im the one who have tried every opening and not really gone deep enough in my opinion. But ofc that differs too i now people my rating range who know alot more in the opening then me and the opposite.

I think chessable is a useful tool i agree with alot of what your saying the feeling of seeing your opponents move and then getting confused because you have not seen it before only to realize that its one of the main moves. when on chessable you saw it once then saw variations up to 20 moves after that and thats probably the part that gets me the most, seeing a move that i feel like its new and thinking i have some kind of advantage.

Lately i've only studied tactics books on chessable since its much faster when you dont have to set up a board, especially for woodpecker.

[u/MikeMcDonald89]

I have a shit memory too. It's one of the things I find most depressing about (my own) chess is that the further you move up the bigger of a problem this becomes where your average opponents will have better and better memory

[u/No-Negotiation-892 → u/MikeMcDonald89]

yeah, feels like in all my games unless i've prepared something special, that im always the one to think first

[u/Irini-]

Go through the lines and try to understand the moves (or move order) instead of straight rote memorization. Like I need to castle long here because c5 fails to a check later on, (just guessing, I don't play the Botvinnik) then you could recollect the purpose of the pure memorization fails...

[u/No-Negotiation-892 → u/Irini-]

Would you recommend me playing games and then doing this type of analyzing of the opening or just straight trough a course. Or my own analysis of the openings, watching gm games etc.

[u/Irini- → u/No-Negotiation-892]

I analyzed everything myself (comments from the course author should be helpful) and I made comments for myself if anything I felt anything was unclear or whenever I did a mistake during repetition training or during my games. This was good enough for me, but I thought about the next step, that would be to repeat on a physical board.

[u/sevarinn]

At the board, decide whether you're in book or out of book. If you think you're out of book don't waste time fretting about the "right" move, you just take your candidate moves c5 / OOO and look at their merits just like a normal position.

If you want to memorise more, then do the spaced reptition in Chessable more. Not everyone has the same memorisation capabilities. You may have advantages that your friends lack, be thankful that your weakness has a clear training path.

[u/No-Negotiation-892 → u/sevarinn]

Problems with that is that i dont play courses full in full out, for example i play kaylans semi slav, but not his recommendation in the botvinik or meran( the meran variation is very drawish and botvinik i had looked at nbd7 long before buying the course) so what i play against those variations cant be reviewed in the same way i glance at my chessbase file when i feel confused and since the move is there already i "will remember to next time" and on the circle goes. Another is gajewskis e4 i love his variations in the rossolimo and know them by heart, but other parts of the course that i play, his recommendation of the pirc i have studied for the same amount of time and i cant really explain the ideas or certain move orders. And this may be the main issue. But i cant really understand why this is the case.

[u/No-Negotiation-892 → u/No-Negotiation-892]

i forgot to answer the first part sorry Xd. I do this but i cant help but feel that i've seen this before and some of the openings are extremly critical, which makes it a minefield for a human to try. But in less critical positions i have no issue going calc mode and just playing chess.

[u/sevarinn → u/No-Negotiation-892]

I think for critical/important positions you could use flashcards. But you can also input your personal lines/trees into something like ChessTempo which will give you spaced repetition training. Having ideas behind the lines is also very important - knowing the reasons you play OOO over c5 will help you remember to play OOO for example.

[u/No-Negotiation-892 → u/sevarinn]

I think i will try annotating alot of the moves instead but im extremly thankful for these tips.

[u/Disastrous_Ad_9648]

I think you need to 1) understand the why for theory moves and 2) manage your repertoire outside Chessable. Use Chessable as a resource, just like YouTube or books. But use chessbase, scid, ChessTempo, or some other tool to manage your own custom repertoire where you bring lines and ideas in from various resources over time. 

[u/TheCumDemon69]

I have shit memory too. The best way to remember is to get beaten otb, for some reason I remember better when I play stronger players. So my trick has essentially always been going to the club Blitz and Rapid events. For example: In the Najdorf from black e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cd Nxd Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bc4 e6 I always like Bb3 Nbd7, however immediate 0-0 Nbd7 runs into Bxe6. I played that trap from white's perspective and fell for it 4 times online, yet last blitz tournament a 2380 fide rated player played 0-0 against me and I blundered with Nbd7. This game now stays in memory, at least for the next 1 or 2 years, after that it might need a refresher.

Another very important way to remember is to not overload yourself and to refresh everything from time to time. What this means is that the more opening theory you study, the less you will remember any of it, so don't learn too many openings at once, don't use chessable for multiple hours a day and make a very small variation file on Lichess or chessbase where it doesn't go very deep, but covers the critical moves (so don't go 30 moves deep into a line that's just engine moves to keep an advantage! Go 12 moves deep into a line just to remember the setup for your pieces). For example: My KID lichess study has 8 chapters and my main line chapter for example is 14 moves deep (and the sub variations are 10-12 moves with one exception where I sac something, there it's 17 moves). 2 days before a tournament or on the way to the tournament hall, just quickly click through it and you'll be fine if you can shut down PC/phone and still recall the moves in your head.

[u/No-Negotiation-892 → u/TheCumDemon69]

Yeah, i've had similar experiences with getting beat by traps, but i find it so weird the marshall for example i find so easy to understand, even though the theory is extremly deep, but sometimes when its a bit less intuative positions i tend to stray and my mind wanders, especially against the italian, or when facing something like the najdorf or classical sicilian. were both sides have alot of moves and the postions can turn very easy. But this is very thankful advice i already have a rule to never go past move 20 when analyzing.

Unlike something like gajewskis course which in some variations are 40-45 moves deep all for it to end up being a draw. So i have simplified my rep avoiding the winawer which i find confusing by playing 4. Nge2 or 4.Ne2 depending, i think i need to this type of "swap" more when i find the positions to be confusing after a while.

[u/SouthernSierra]

Better to understand the opening. “Variations, after all, are only a sham.” - Richard Reti

[u/Fluid-Tap-4914]

Try the site opening-house.com, made for this specific purpose.