I have noticed that professionals change their opening a lot from game to game. They seem to have a few in their pocket but vary them frequently. I am sure a large part of it is that they know the players they are up against and can change their opening to their advantage. Yet amateurs online or in tournaments very seldom play the same player. So if you are in that situation as black how do you choose your opening sequence? Do you stick with one opening you are familiar? Is it just mood dependent or what?

I have one that I always play. I have all the reasonable variations memorized until about 5 moves.

I have no opening.

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

I am with speedchase.

Playing in a club setting, people will either just play the traditional opening, because they are weak amateurs and the first five moves don't matter, or they will mix it up a little. I think in clubs people play the same players over and over. For the pros it kind of makes sense if you have a best of 3, 5, 7... 10 to be able to change pace. I expect pros also play each others favorite openings to find nice refutations, even if they end up losing one here or there. IE Cho will play the Chinese against Kato just find out how Kato refutes certain moves, since Kato was considered somewhat of an expert at playing the Chinese.

Often choose an opening based upon what kind of game I wish to play. Above that is the influence that my overall style has on my choice of opening. I prefer to prevent moyo games, spoil corners, and keep the game open and vague until I can see a clear, non-disadvantageous direction. I've also been studying the endgame more, so don't mind long games with good endgame potential from my groups.

If I were in a serious tournament, then I would research my opponents' games so that I could come prepared with a strategy.

I vary it. I played the same opening as Black for 20 years and then changed it to another one for 10 years, then went back to the original for the last 10 years. Admittedly that is not a lot of variation, but it is some.

With white I have never had a standard opening as it depends on how black plays.

_________________
Still officially AGA 5d but I play so irregularly these days that I am probably only 3d or 4d over the board (but hopefully still 5d in terms of knowledge, theory and the ability to contribute).

I have one favorite opening as black (orthodox), and a second that I play often (http://senseis.xmp.net/?ParallelFusekiBlackEnclosure), followed by a few stragglers (mini-Chinese, kobayashi). When I want to go outside my comfort zone, I play Nirensei or Sanrensei.

For a long time, I played only the orthodox. Then I decided to experiment, and settled on a few more patterns I enjoyed. I have never enjoyed playing 3-5 points, or 3-3 points.

I think if I wanted to learn more about the opening, I would play more 3-5 points, or avoid immediate enclosures for the 3-4 points--it seems like there are the most subtleties and fewest fixed patterns in those sorts of openings.

For white, I play Nirensei, mukai komoku, or one 4-4 point and one 3-4 point. Mostly the choice is independent of what my opponent plays, but I have a few anti-Chinese choices.

_________________
Occupy Babel!

I picked Orthodox as an opening for black very soon after I started playing with the reasoning that it gave me both an enclosure and a 4-4 stone to get practice in at both of those, it's just got stuck after I've become so used to it now. For white I typically play nirensei for no particular reason.

Both of those might get discarded if I see my opponent does something very unusual as sometimes you just don't get a choice.

PeterN

I've played the same opening as black and white for last two years, star-point and oppt-facing 3-5. I've learned that many people have no idea how to play against 3-5, which lead to many early leads.

I vowed to change it up after the last Congress, and have done so. I haven't settled on a new opening yet but suspect it will include a 3-4, so I can learn more about it.

_________________
- Brady
Want to see videos of low-dan mistakes and what to learn from them? Brady's Blunders

I tend to play a fixed opening as black or white in serious games and mix it up if I'm just playing around. I figure may as well learn one set of openings well, so I can focus on getting to middle game in a good position.

I usually play some opening for a while, then change. I want to master many different openings in the end, even though I think it's the least important part of the game.

I like cross fuseki the most, but in most games the opponent doesn't agree to that. As black I nowadays play two komoku, to practice komoku joseki. As white I play two hoshi, because Vesa said that if you want to win a game with white, you have to play two hoshi.

Having still a lot of komoku joseki to learn, I think this is fine for now...

If you do not get a good position in the opening and you are playing a strong player then you will normally win the game. I have read of several pros who think it the most important part of the game. I am sure many others agree. As you get stronger you will realize that it is far from the least important.

_________________
Still officially AGA 5d but I play so irregularly these days that I am probably only 3d or 4d over the board (but hopefully still 5d in terms of knowledge, theory and the ability to contribute).

As long as I am making middle game mistakes that immediately cost me the game, I think I should spend my resources correcting them. Fuseki mistakes can be often repaired. As 3 dan or so, I could start studying opening theory. At this level it is much faster to improve by L&D and tesuji.

I also wonder that if opening isn't the least important part of the game, which one it is then...

Maybe counting at the end? Usually the game is decided by then, and not much can be done to improve one's position.

_________________
- Brady
Want to see videos of low-dan mistakes and what to learn from them? Brady's Blunders

I have to wonder if pros think the opening is the most important part of the game mainly when playing other pros, and if their opinions would differ were they watching a game between two low dans or weaker.

_________________
We don't know who we are; we don't know where we are.
Each of us woke up one moment and here we were in the darkness.
We're nameless things with no memory; no knowledge of what went before,
No understanding of what is now, no knowledge of what will be.

For certain. I've heard them say just that.

_________________
- Brady
Want to see videos of low-dan mistakes and what to learn from them? Brady's Blunders

I think that even the pros who think the opening as most important stage of the game, would agree that as long as a player has critical flaws in middle and endgame, they are the areas to be improved. Good opening doesn't protect that much from screwing up later in the game, and yet good middle game and yose often turn games around. I think this is simply because of the order of the stages. It is easier to determinedly lose somewhat later.

OMG are we having the your opening doesn't matter discussion again? Here let me solve the riddle for you. Since strong players care about the opening, however you don't care about the opening therefore you must be weak.

I didn't say it doesn't matter at all. Only that it's relatively unimportant compared to middle- and endgame.

Caring about the opening doesn't make a weak player strong, either. If an amateur player is weak, it's because he or she cannot read.

You think...?





Two of many, but I think your hope to put the words in the mouths of professionals is perhaps misdirected.