Good plain english Chess Opening books?

I'm looking to improve my overall opening knowledge.  I actually only know the name of a few openings, and only know them through the first 3-4 moves.  I do okay, but my game would probably improve a bit if I knew more themes.

What, in your opinion (I know this will vary greatly, which is fantastic), are some of the best opening books that are in plain English?  I'm not talking database books like MCO, I'm talking about books that explain things while going through them.

I understand the importance of MCO, but I have a very hard time retaining that info.

Thanks for the help!

The "Starting Out" series published by Everyman Chess explains the openings pretty thoroughly. Caution: each book is focused on one particular opening, i.e. the Sicilian, Queen's Gambit, etc.

really? i had the feeling the starting out books were a bit superficial, but maybe i had the wrong impression. the explanation seem to be good though from first impression.

Thanks for the answers guys!

I think you'll find Paul van der Sterren's Fundamental Chess Openings (FCO) to be just what you need.  Advanced players hate the book because the author will spend up to a paragraph discussing 1 move and most of the lines are quite short, anywhere from 6 to 10 or 12 moves.  What an 1800+ finds superficial makes it an ideal introduction for beginners and intermediates.  At 480 pages though, it's certainly not something you'll outgrow in a few months.  Currently considered the gold standard for 1 volume opening encyclopedias.

I like Richard Palliser's Starting Out: Closed Sicilian.

I too assumed that the Starting Out books would be superficial but it's actually rather dense, not suitable IMO for someone truly starting out with chess openings, but for someone who already knows the basics of the Sicilian and wants to specialize.

I'll be checking that out!  Thanks baddogno!

JoeH: I mean no disrespect, but if you are as unfamiliar with openings as you say,  The Complete Idiot's Guide to Chess Openings is a not a bad place to start.

It's easy, fun reading providing a panoramic view of the openings which will be useful when you are ready to drill down. Lots of words and diagrams, no move listings. I found it so absorbing I read most of it in a night and finished it the next day.

Skip the phone books like MCO. Those are reference books. Maybe some people learn openings from those, but I've always used the one-book-one-opening approach for my bread and butter openings with the database books as a supplement, and for looking up unfamiliar lines I run into.

Well, I don't really consider myself a "newbie", I've been playing since high school (over 20 years now), I have some knowledge, but I'm looking to expand it for the first time in over a year.

Thanks icpress12!  Didn't see your comment there.

How are the "deangerous weapons of chess" series?  Those seem like a good place for a few.

Go for a repertoire and not a single opening.

I'm looking at openings in general not just a single one....but I think it would be advantagaous to know the theory behind the different openings.

Of course if you want a classical education, The Ideas Behind  The Chess Openings by Reuben Fine (there is an algebraic edition) would be a fine place to start.  Sure the theory is 70 years old and there are a few gaps (Najdorf Sicilian is missing in action) but a nice slim volume packed with mostly still relevant ideas.  If you have deep pockets there is a very nice 4 volume series called Chess Opening Essentials, The ideas & Plans Behind ALL Chess Openings.  Multicolor printing, lots of diagrams with arrows and a carefully chosen sample of example games (unannotated however).  Very nice but expensive and covers the same ground as FCO.  I of course have all 3 .  Good stuff to have around when you stumble across a new opening in correspondence games and have a couple of days to figure out what to do.  In truth although I love my books you could get most of their information online and of course none of them will go as deep as a database.  You have to be careful with databases though.  Just because a line is popular doesn't mean it hasn't been refuted; it may just mean the stats haven't caught up.  IM Pfren is of course correct; we don't really need any of this stuff, we just need to play chess.

Thanks everyone for all the answers!  I think I can make an educated guess on where I need to look for some instruction!

i have chess opening essentials and to be honest i think its useless and that its really too superficial.  you not going to really understand the openings by just studying the book, at least i didnt.

The ones I have are ''Mastering the Chess Openings'' from John Watson, volume 1 and 2. (Open, semi open, closed, Indian games)

It is more holistic than most books and yet not that superficial you can't do very much with it if you were actually trying one of the openings. 

Awesome! Thanks guys and gals (if any responded)!

Another issue is learning style.

Once I get interested in something, I start reading about it widely. If the text is too advanced or boring, I bounce off it and maybe come back later. But most books will offer at least a few nuggets and after a while connections build up.

As long as I'm interested, I keep my momentum and motivation up, and I keep learning. If I'm learning too much of one thing and not enough of another, I notice that eventually and make adjustments.

pfren's recommendations wouldn't work for me. Maybe some people develop their chess that way, bully for them, but not me. Most of the friends I played chess with in high school and college made it to expert and master; they sure studied opening books when they were young.

Maybe they didn't need to. A case can be made that an educated Westerner doeesn't need to read anything beyond the Bible, Shakespeare, Plato and Euclid, but who really does that?

As well as for beginners who have been playing chess a long time.

didnt the world champion lasker once wrote a book where he put down a plan for a weak player to become strong. Didnt he also mention opening training in his book, or do i remember it incorrectly??