This probably depends on your style of play. If you like an attacking game then why not try a Queen's Gambit as white? 
It isn't difficult to understand the basic principles, usually turns into a strong attacking position for White and is almost always fun.
A
There aren't any. As a beginner, you focus on Tactics and Endgames first, and openings last.
I like the English as a beginners opening. But if you focus on tactics and just continue playing your game will improve. Do not be discouraged.
There aren't any. As a beginner, you focus on Tactics and Endgames first, and openings last.
He speaks the truth! As long as you know the basic ideas of the opening, you should be able to take on any opening your opponent hurls at you.
Like herrickc24, I am a beginner and feel the need to have some ideas about how to get a game started. I have now come to the conclusion - about two minutes ago - that this is a bit like starting a conversation in a foreign language: you can get things going by rehearsing a great opening line, but you won't understand anything that is thrown back at you until you get to grips with some grammar and some vocabulary! This echoes what I read in a recent chess.com forum that, as a beginner, I should spend 60% of my time learning Tactics, 30% on End Game and 10% on Openings. This is very much what dc1085 indicates above in this forum. I think a book was mentioned as well: "How To Open a Chess Game" . I thought that I'd throw that last bit in to contradict myself! Hope this has been of some help, herrickc24. But if you're a stubborn as I am, you'll struggle along for another month or so before reading the next Forum on Openings and then the penny (or cent) will drop! Good luck with your Tactics and End Game!!
Italian game. Really if after 1.e4-e5 2.Nf3-Nc6 3.Bc4 There is nothing wrong with this initial opening sequence. There is only three moves to remember and after Bc4 white is ready to castle. Of course be prepared to play chess after black's third move.
The Italian Game is a very fine opening for any level (even a GM!) and the general concept is very simple - develop quickly and target the f7 square, Black's weak point at the start of the game.
The goal of the opening is simply to put your pieces on good squares as fast as you can. There are thousands of systems for doing this and each has its own advantages and disadvantages. If you want to memorize book moves and try to really understand the pros and cons of each move, then you will probably end up with a better position in the middle game, but it takes a lot of time and effort that can be spent better elsewhere.
Just play carefully and keep the goal of efficient development in mind and you'll have a playable game.
My advise is if you can't can't castle in four moves you are playing the wrong opening.
My advise is if you can't can't castle in four moves you are playing the wrong opening.
That's ridiculous. The minimum number of moves required to castle is 3 already: e5 Nf3 Bc4, and these cannot always be played right away, not to mention there are often better moves and sometimes castling can lead to danger if there is an attack. I have seen games where players castle on the 20th move and still do fine.
I agree hydroxide. Some players know how to specifically target castled kings as well and their tactics fall apart with out it.
Try the fried liver attack for learning tactics, and ruy lopez exchange for learning positional struggles. Scandinavian 2...Nf6 for black.
dont go with easy. start with the most complex possible( ruy lopez flohr zaitsev variation and semi-slav botvinnik variation) and then work your way toward easier. Then you would understand complexities a lot better.
I'd suggest the Evans Gambit as White. It starts from the Italian Game with 1.e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 and the gambit is on move 4 with 4.b4. You gambit a wing pawn for a strong initiative and attacking chances. I think this could be a good opening for lower leveled players because it forces you to learn how to attack and seeing as at around 1100-1300 you tend to drop pawns anyway, why not get something in return for it?
There aren't any. As a beginner, you focus on Tactics and Endgames first, and openings last.
No matter how true this is, it doesn't help a beginner. The odds are already against them, so it would be helpful to know an opening that doesn't have a lot of pitfalls...
As part of your repetoire as a beginner, try to pick about 3 openings for white, 3 for black, and stick with them all the time. Everything else will be too much at this stage. You should be able to play into them about 10 moves and understand what "breaks" them and how to avoid your opponent's strategy of breaking them.
With this in mind, I'd have to say that (for white) the Queen's Gambit is really good, especially the Catalan versions of it. Colle/Torre/Zukertort are also pretty good for white, as is the Scotch game (which is only e4 instead of the e3 in the Colle).
Starting black defenses are a little harder to come by, since they rely so much on what white does. Answer the king's pawn (e4) with a symmetrical (e5) defense such as a Two-knights. Queen pawn should be answered symmetrically as well, as in a Colle/Zukertort. All other openings should probably be answered by Fianchetto-type (Indian) defenses, followed by castling, since flank openings are not actively occupying the center at the start.
This is a general suggestion and I'm by no means suggesting that these responses can be a panacea.
As your Chess knowledge builds and grows, expect to move away from certain lines and find favor with others. This is why openings aren't considered particularly important for a beginner - you will eventually be able to equalize from any starting position once you understand good tactical play.
Not true. There is no real logic in focusing on openings last. If you choose to do this then do it.
If you are losing or lost after the opening it wont matter how good you are in endings because you are not likely to reach one. The few times you do, if you are several pawns down, or more, your endgame knowledge is not likely to save the game against any decent opponent. I often am asked by starting/weaker players if I think they should study openings and I always ask them are they losing games in the openings? If they are then they should certainly spend some time on openings. If they are ok after the opening and losing in the middlegame then they better work on middlegames/tactics/strategy. If they are making it to equal endings or even better endings and only then losing then study endings ! How are you losing the majority of your games ? The answer to this will tell you where you need to concentrate your work but it doesnt mean to ignore everything else in chess.
Well said!
I often am asked by starting/weaker players if I think they should study openings and I always ask them are they losing games in the openings? If they are then they should certainly spend some time on openings.
Most of them lose games because they drop material to simple tactics. Beginners who don't notice a simple fork on move 6 don't need opening theory, they need to start noticing forks (better awareness of tactics and better concentration).
But of course, that's just a minor remark to your otherwise good point :)
What is the best opening(s) for beginning players? i haven't been very successful in live chess and am wondering if part of that could be because of how i set up the pieces in the early parts of the game. thanks for any tips!