Beginner Question: How is the opening determined?

I am a new player just learning openings. So far I have only used one book opening, the Ruy Lopez as white, and won.

I often hear players talk about their "favorite opening" etc. My question is:

Which player decides the opening? Both players cannot use their favorite opening for each color in the same game, correct? So don't both players need to have an opening reportoire that spans a myriad of openings?

Usualy whites have the lead because they move first.

So whites play the opening they like, and get into diferent variations depending on how black plays.

Black will be playing the theory, this is know that opening and play it. Can also play some general defence, like the Indian.

If they get into a move they don't know the theory, then they will play following the principles of the opening, this implicates thinking the moves, wich is time consuming.

Sometimes they will try to force the position to the opening they know, so on the comments they maybe say something like "I play this move becouse it makes the position looks sorta like the Ruy Lopez and I know that position very well".

Example:

Player A: (I prefer e4 to d4): 1.e4
Player B: (Oh, it would be better 1.d4, let's pray for Alapin): 1...c5
Player A: (I wanted Ruy Lopez but still...Let's be French(2...e6)): 2.Nf3
Player B: (OK, no Alapin, so Dragon!): 2...d6
Player A: (Damn, I don't like Najdorf or stuffs like that): 3.Bb5

At the end it's Canal-Sokolsky variation (I think... maybe it's Moskow).

I mean it's hard to define which one choose the opening.

nononono theres no need for those DVDs at his level (and maybe at any level cause its Dzindzi lol but thats besides the point anyways)

Just learn common tactical patterns.  ex) Back rank mate. Learn this one inside out. Forks, skewers, etc, etc...

Roman's Labs are excellent! However, I wouldn't recommend the "rapid repertoire" DVDs. I'd say our OP should play a bit, research some openings online (maybe by watching videos on youtube) and when he's figured out what kind of openings he'd like to play (I assume BenTheMighty is a he) then get a DVD about particular openings, as they go more in depth. That being said, for a beginner, maybe the rapid ones would be good, though you won't get to choose your own repertoire, you'll basically be following Roman's instead.

The opening is just kind of arrived at though. If I'm white, I know I like to play e4 because it usually leads to more open and tactical positions than d4 or c4, but if my opponent wants a quiet game, he might play 1...e5 hoping for 2.Nf3 so he can get into the Petrov, but then he'll be surprised when I reel out 2.f4 and bring him into the King's Gambit - one of the most aggressive openings at white's disposal. Of course, he can then decline the gambit by playing 2...d6, leaving me disappointed that he didn't go for the more ambitious 2...exf4.

After a little while and a little research, you come to know most of the main openings and variations by name :)

EDIT: To BenTheMighty! You'll need to prepare a defence to both 1.e4 and 1.d4 for black, as well as 1.c4 and maybe 1.Nf3 if you want to be a little more extensive... I'd recommend Andrew Martin's video on the Old Indian, as it will cover you against 1.d4, 1.c4, 1.Nf3, 1.g3, and 1.b3. It's also not as popular a response as the King's Indian Defence, so white players will be less prepared, but the fact that it's so versatile is really good. You don't have to learn tonnes of different openings, you just learn that, learn something against 1.e4, and that's your black repertoire complete :)

http://www.amazon.com/Foxy-Openings-DVD-Volume-Anti-Flank/dp/B000MRZTWA

^I was surprised to hear people questioning Dzindzi too! Though you raise an excellent point with the video library on chess.com; I dare say it's well worth the membership fee! There are loooots of videos, plus you get the tactics trainer and chess mentor program too! :)

The problem with Roman's dvd's is that he sometimes "forgets" to analyze the best reply of the opponent. He also tends to be a bit baised. For example if he explains a variation against the caro cann he claims it it be better for white where other GM's asses the same position as equal.

There are better dvd's about openings for example Jan Gustafson on e4-e5 is very nice.

Think of an opening like a living thing, that must be classified by looking at it more and more closely as more information is revealed.

In taxonomy, an animal (or plant) is part of a taxonomic: kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, and species.

If you and a friend were to "choose" a plant or animal by selecting, in turn, from the lists of available choices at each taxonomic level, you'd end up with one particular, specific thing.  Each choice made by either one of you would eliminate many (or even most) of the possible choices for the next guy, but you'd still have a whole menu of possible choices to choose from.

You open, and choose "animal kingdom," and thus your friend can't, no matter how much he'd like to, steer it toward a "plant."

He chooses "chordata phylum," so you've got lots of popular animals available, but won't be able to choose a worm or a sponge or something.

You go for "mammalia class," because you know mammals better than lizards and stuff.

He chooses "primates order," because he knows how well you know cats and dogs, and wants to avoid your preparation in domesticated animals.

You shrug, say "oh well," and guess you might as well steer it down the well-worn "hominidae family" path, since you don't know much about lemurs and such, and are more familar with great apes, being one and all.

He throws you off your home ground by choosing the "gorilla genus."

And you're left with a handful of viable moves where you can choose from among bonobo chimps, western lowland gorillas, and what have you.

Same thing happens in a chess game.  Both players narrow it down more and more as moves are made, shutting off some branches forever, and leaving others open to explore.  (Let's ignore transpositions for the moment, or the comparison crumbles!)

You choose 1.e4, shutting off the d4 kingdom, the c4 kingdom, and lots and lots of minor kingdoms.

He replies ...e5, choosing the open games phylum, but saying goodbye to the Siclilans, the Frenches, the Caro Kann's, etc.

You choose Nf3, which narrows it further (no Vienna Games or King's Gambits)...he replies Nc6 (no Philidors or Petroffs)...you play Bb5 (so you've narrowed it to a Ruy Lopez)...he chooses a6 and you're in the Morphy variation...and you choose between BxN and Ba4, which will define the course even further.

So in this way, both players define the opening, and thus the course of the game.

I think Estragon is right about focusing on basic principles rather then learning all of the openings.  At low level play you lose due to bad tactics, poor position, and blunders; not because you didn't choose the best opening theory.  Generally I would say remember just the first one or two responses to the first and second moves of the game then go from there based on sound principles.  Opening principles?  Only move each piece once, dominate the center, don't block in bishops, and castle early (king saftey).  And of course, always focus on tactics...  I would use the tactics trainer they have here or on chesstempo.

Wow, thanks for the advice guys! Lots of really great advice here.

I have been focusing on tactics and mating strategies with the tactics trainer and chess mentor, and I plan on focusing mostly on those. Sometimes I get bored of it though, but I still want to devote time to chess. With that free time I think I could start memorizing openings. It couldn't hurt could it?

Anyways thankyou for the answer, I guess I will have to learn a lot of openings and responses to openings.