Missing the Point

Why rote memorization doesn't work

When you’re learning the opening it’s tempting to memorize as many lines as you can as quickly as possible, but as you’ve probably experienced, this isn’t as helpful as you might think once you get into a real game. I experienced this in an online rapid game I played last week in the States Cup tournament. I (mostly) remembered my preparation, but didn’t understand that the moves were tied together by a hidden idea, which would have been extremely relevant had I known about it.

Playing Black, I got this position from a Queen’s Gambit Declined with 4…a6.

This is a typical position for this opening. Black doesn’t want to trade bishops on f4 because White’s f4-pawn would exert a clamp on e5 and threaten to trap the bishop by advancing to f5, so you have to find something else to do.

I learned this opening from Christof Sielecki’s Keep It Simple For Black course on Chessable. Here I remembered that my move was 12…Rfe8. My opponent responded with 13. Rfc1, which looked a little odd, but I remembered the plan from the course was to force White to resolve the tension between the bishops by playing g6 and Nh5. Play continued 13…g6 14. Rab1 Nh5 15. Bxd6 Qxd6.

All according to plan, right? Not exactly. It turns out that in the line in the course White plays Rfe1 and Rac1, not Rfc1 and Rab1 in the game. Does this make any difference?

That’s exactly the sort of question I should have been asking myself, along with many others:

• Does Rfe8 have any point apart from occupying a half-open file?

• What’s up with Rfe1 in the course line? Isn’t that rook just staring at the e-pawn?

• What does g6 have to do with the Nh5 plan? Couldn’t I just play Nh5 immediately without g6?

Another Chessable author, Surya Ganguly, likes to say, “Memorizing without understanding is a sin.” In this case I committed that sin and it cost me. Had I asked more questions while I was studying, I would have been better equipped to navigate the game.

After 13. Rfc1, the move my opponent played in the game, the computer’s top line is 13…Bxf4 14. exf4 Ne4!

Play could then continue 15. Nxe4 dxe4 16. Bxe4 Bxh3!

Now we understand both Rfe8 and White’s reply Rfe1 in the course line. In addition to putting a rook on a half-open file, Black was threatening Ne4. White’s response Rfe1 prepares for Ne4 by defending e4 in advance. The line continues 17. Bxh7+ Kxh7 18. Ng5+ Kg8 19. Nxh3 Rad8.

White is up a pawn, but his remaining pawns are weak. The computer thinks Black is doing fine.

In the game, after 13…g6 14. Rab1, conditions were even better for the Ne4 idea because now there is no Bxh7+ and a2 is undefended.

Now 15..Ne4 16. Nxe4 dxe4 17. Bxe4 Bxa2 would just be winning for Black.

White doesn’t have to play along with this, but even with best play he’s fighting for equality after Ne4.

The key point is that while I more or less remembered the moves from the course, I didn’t understand at all that both sides’ play was revolving around Black’s idea of Ne4, so when my opponent played a move that made Ne4 even more powerful, I didn’t pick up on it.

This highlights the many problems with memorizing without understanding:

1. Your opponent probably won’t play the line you memorized and you won’t know how to handle it if they play something else.

2. Even if they do play your line, without a concept to anchor on, you probably won’t remember it correctly.

3. If by some miracle they play the line and you remember it, you still won’t know how to play the resulting position.

I want to be clear that I’m not blaming Christof, whose courses are excellent, but my own shoddy study process.

When learning an opening, resist the temptation to rifle through the lines as quickly as possible. You might succeed in memorizing them, but it won’t work out well for you in real games. Instead, slow down, ask lots of questions, and answer them using the engine and database. This will make your preparation much more robust for real games.