[toolslive]

I'm at 2250 on Lichess, and I consider openings a waste of time. Ok, I confess I wasted a lot of time on them in the past, and my rating was rather constant for years and years, until I started tactics via the woodpecker method. It's hard work, but definitely worth it. (quite a few of the easier exercises are opening tactics)

https://www.amazon.com/Woodpecker-Method-Axel-Smith-Tikkanen...

[david_shaw]

From the (linked above) Amazon description:

> The quick explanation of the Woodpecker Method is that you need to solve a large number of puzzles in a row; then solve the same puzzles again and again, only faster. It’s not a lazy shortcut to success – hard work is required. But the reward can be re-programming your unconscious mind. Benefits include sharper tactical vision, fewer blunders, better play when in time trouble and improved intuition.

This seems pretty similar to the Chess.com "puzzle rush" game, although I'll admit that I haven't actually tried that yet.

[bitcoinmoney]

What age did you get serious with chess? 2200 in lichess is high.

[toolslive]

I started too late: 17

[blub]

Funny how everyone that says openings are waste of time have already wasted their time on them and built an opening repertoire :)

What do you do know, play specific openings or move by instinct until reaching the middlegame? Willing to bet it's the former.

[toolslive]

My current strategy is this (mind I do have knowlegde, it just needs expanding) Whenever I play a game, I check afterwards from the point where the preparation (and my knowledge) ended what I should have played, and if it's in line with theory.

  - If the move I played is in line with theory, I don't bother trying to remember it because I can find it. 
  - If there are more than 1 plausible move in theory and my move is one of them, don't bother because I can find it.
  - If theory happens to be something I can't find on my own, then I investigate the idea behind it and automagically I remember (at least for some time)