CPT Community

How is an opening repretoire can be classified within a certain rating range ?,for example between 1600-2000 ? and on what certeria this calssification is based ?

Of course you can adapt the repertoire or parts of it even if you are lower or higher rated..1600-2000 is just an estimate. But imo a certain amount of (at least) basic chess knowledge(=rating?) is needed to understand some of the variations. There is no point for a complete beginner to play c5,g6 without having any knowledge on how to play against the Maroczy bind (strenght in endings,e.g.). If you don't know how to conduct a kingside attack you won't know what to do in the sicilian with white, petroff, scothc gambit and so on, once the theory ends.imo if you'r under 1600 then you are more or less still a beginner and youll improve faster by concentrating on engames, tactics and strategy.

I have knowledge of a few openings especially the Petrov that leads to many other openings. I am trying to focus on end game stratergy, is there a repertoire made exploring End Games? As you say : "youll improve faster by concentrating on engames, tactics and strategy".

@Steve: Have a look at this site: http://wwwu.uni-klu.ac.at/gossimit/c/chess.htm You can find some good stuff there. Maybe you want to create some tactic or end game repertoire for CPT and share it. I recommend to create one sub-repertoire for positions where white has to move and one for black. Also check out the additional documentation by Io for tactic training with CPT which you can find in the download section (manuals).

For more information about the specifics of this repertoire, one should check out the two Chess Openings, Explained books by Alburt, Dzindzi, and Perelshteyn which just happen to cover the same lines.

This looks a lot like Chess Openings for B/W Explained

I found two positions in this repertoire in the Scotch Gambit that Fritz classified as major blunders and was able to find much better moves, there are possibly more such blunders throughout the other subrepertoires. Besides that, this is a pretty good repertoire ^_^

@Copeland: Hmmm, you wouldn't care to elaborate...?

Just had a look, its quite extensive, you have done quite a bit of work on it.....thanks!

I think it's a good repertoire. It's a little obvious it is based on the Alburt books:-) but so what, that just means in order to get the most out of the repertoire you will have to buy the books. One question: Are the blunders flat out blunders humans can see? Or are they blunders that could confuse a human but computers can sort. Reason I ask is because if it's a hard one to sort out, might be a useful blunder. Can you tell which move it is here?