A Complete Repertoire For a Beginner

How about this?

"... you keep this sh*t up and I will continue to Redact your messages as well intentionally mis-representing your posts ..."

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/are-my-go-to-openings-good

I do not intentionally mis-represent posts.

How much chess.com reaction has there been with regard to what you claim?

It's okay if you don't want to answer. Perhaps people will guess correctly.

" I am the best, you others know nothing, blah, blah, blah"

Dude do you have your own opinion or are you a citation machine. 

kindaSpongey 2020

Depends on the subject.

This is the one case where I wish I could have multiple accounts!  Only one to play chess on - I do not believe in cheating - but 4 more to file 4 more complaints from what appears to be different users on this master miss-quoter!

How much chess.com reaction has there been with regard to whatever you have reported?

I am very selective with what I report and only reported this an hour ago.  Prior to this?  2 for 2 in 2020.  I will laugh if it becomes 3 for 3!

https://youtu.be/v2qiasIGYZE - Chess game analysis pls watch

How about Bird's opening? There's no opening traps, just some solid ideas behind the moves. For example, I play a reversed Leningrad Dutch formation (Which GM Henrik Danielsen calls the "Polar Bear"), and have had moderate success (my endgame sucks). It can teach the player to attack with his f-pawn moved up, and learn to defend (because the f-pawn is moved up). However, it is very offbeat so I'm not sure that you'll find a lot of instructive games.

I play Reti and that fits well, it's extremely positional and if you play classical reti instead of the modern one, there are good chances to attack

The London is actually pretty easy to learn, not a lot of theory is required since its opening moves are pretty much the same in almost all variations. maybe a little different move order at times, but ultimately the same development is reached.

Thanks for all the suggestions. I don't like anything that has to do with moving the f-pawn as that is counterproductive for the beginner. The Reti is fine, but I'd rather get some open positions so tactics are more frequent. The London is also fine, and personally I play sometimes, but that to me seems to be a temporary opening as playing similar positions all the time is somewhat boring and doesn't allow a lot of room for different positions

Can I make 2 suggestions on openings for people starting out:

1. Pick a favorite player. Go over their annotated "best" games, especially where they beat lesser GMs like rented mules. Then make your own opening pamphlet from his/her games. You will learn some lines that way but more importantly learn how them without disconnection to middlegame ideas. You'll have gaps so when you lose a game look to fill the gap.

2. Alternately, try to pick openings where the strategic plan coming out of the opening is clear. I don't mean London or its ilk; I mean Maroczy bind formations for example, or isolated QPs. Then, against people at you level & the next one up, you will need to recall fewer moves into the opening as you can operate from there based on general principles. 

(just my opinion- the beginning phase of chess doesn't last long if you are having fun so openings then are really not that critical) --Bill

Thanks Bill! Good stuff you said.

"... A typical way of choosing an opening repertoire is to copy the openings used by a player one admires. ... However, what is good at world-championship level is not always the best choice at lower levels of play, and it is often a good idea to choose a 'model' who is nearer your own playing strength. ..." - FM Steve Giddins (2008)

gambits

My 2 bits of advice for today.

1. Don't play for traps. It's ok to be familiar with the traps in your prefered lines, ans use them on occasion... but learn sound chess practices.

2. Don't get sucked into learning early king side attacks, or other attacks in the opening. It's great to feel empowered you winning games with those, but eventually you'll hit a rating wall in which your opponents are quietly amused with your early attacks.

Also don't sucked into doing sacrifice attacks unless not taking the sacrificial piece by your opponent leaves you with a playable game.

The other day an opponent of mine pushed a pawn up 2 spaces, clearly wanting me to take it so he had an open line to attack my king. I just ignored taking the pawn, and switched to attacking his now weakened pawn structure.

Once again, thanks everyone. That's an interesting approach, Knobby. It sure is solid. But does it have a lot of tactics? I really think the open games are the best. Also, gambits are unsound