Very sound advice, thanks bro. I was actually just asking outta curiosity. Some people tend to play certain styles although it is useful to be familiar with as many as humanly possible. I wanna know what the coli players go to openings are.
I go up and down in rating a lot. Just mostly due to experimenting. Like I did d4 openings as white. E 4. Tried F and c offset openings, fianchettos, counter gambits in the middle( which mostly results in the alternative pawn not taken sinking and causing problems.
The main thing with most openings is knowing where the focus is as far as breaking open the position. The little hole in the oyster shell needed to crack it open. So it's good to just know openings that even if you don't play..you know what point their focus is on. And sometimes the same square or arrangement is a focal point in different scenarios because of it being fundamentally weak.
I like one minute blitz just to be able to speed up my processing speed. Speed up my ability to formulate a plan. So as a result I like dynamic play. Initiative, pressure. But I also realize now the importance of prophylaxis ( aka preventative moves before a disease really sets in move)
Personally I need to get back to fundamentals and actually learn the theory of openings. And give less opportunity to people plus take them to a deep end where the branches of routes are too many to all be resolved.
So id recommend playing different scenarios not because you want to use it but because the dynamics of how it's blown open or works is the interesting part. A lot of openings are gun fights at the beginning but the slower stuff that's structured is more sound and less vulnerable to being blown. And if he played something out of position it's susceptible to being exposed. Now you just reading who is out of where they should be and what did they leave behind.
.
