beginners shouldn't learn openings??

Playing e3 is not trying to refute anything.You are just being lazy and allow Black to gain an edge.

Maybe a beginner first has to lose a game against this gambit and then find out (learn) how to face it a next time. The problem with gambits is that they require a special (direct) treatement where any knowledge of the basic strategies just fail.

There's no risk. It's not a gambit where black gains any sort of attack or development advantage.

Question of advantage isn't important since we're talking about beginners. But even so Black isn't going to be getting an edge at all since both transpose to an old line in the queen's gambit accepted/French exchange. It's dismissed because there are better options but White is just fine after e3.

I never looked at it honestly. I've seen enough Bb4 traps to steer clear of it. And seeing as the Budapest was played against Aronian this year I'm not too excited about looking for refutations.

TitanCG said :

Question of advantage isn't important since we're talking about beginners.

I guess if you want to stay a beginner this attitude is fine , but what if you want to become a better player ?

An advantage is still important for beginners.

Obviously they don't convert advantages as efficiently, but will still win more games where they start of with an advantage than vice versa.

Well I don't see the opening advantage being important untill well over 2000. All my games come down to tactics in the middlegame.

Tactics in the middlegame are often based on opening advantage.

I would set the limit round about 1500 rating. I agree that tactics is the most important below and around this limit. The stronger your opponents , the more you need strategics to get you into tactics.

The Fajarowicz is 1.d4,Nf6 2.c4,e5 3.dxe5,Ne4 and 4.a3 maintains a slight edge and avoids tactical tricks involving a check at b4.  However, white isn't safe just yet: 4...Bc5 5.e3 defends against checkmate.

You are forced to learn at least one system (or repetoire) with the black pieces.

You can always use that opening from the white side too, if so desired.

If you insist on playing "open games," all bets are off.  The opening tactics will always surprise you, unless you are really booked up.

On balance, the best opening is the one you know and your opponent doesn't.  Very simple.

Everyone must strike their own balance, between opening study and the other phases of the game.  There's no getting around that problem, of managing your study time, efficiently.

It's interesting that @Roopie plays the Vienna opening .  So he's booked up, while his opponents typically aren't.  Unless, they don't play 1) ...e5,  Q.E.D.

Rooperi, is an opening not conciderd a principle of chess?

As any standard game begins with an opening, surely it is only logical that openings are a good thing to begin ones study?

(In a way, that's why for a long time i played 3. Nf3 first; before playing the QN, to avoid the Budapest.)

I think that learning at least the first few moves in the principal variations of the openings you play is worth the effort. Learning all possible opening variations is both impossible and pointless, but you don't play every possible response to every possible opening move. For example I almost always play 1. ... e5 in response to 1. e4 so I have learned the main lines in Berlin defense, Scotch game etc. and it helps a lot. If you lose a game you can look up where you deviated from the recommended line and this way you slowly build up an opening book in your head.

(or 1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3-instead of c4)

Let's also not forget that rooperi is the most woefully underrated player on the site, having won the prestigious "Most Likely to Scalp a Master-Level Player" award no less than 24 times 

Which begs the question: Joe, have you ever beaten a titled player?

I was correct! He has! Although Kacper is notoriously awful at online chess...it still counts.

For those who miss this feature, by the way - it is possible to view your game archives and sort games based on the highest rating. For example:

http://www.chess.com/home/my_archive?show=echess&sortby=rating&result=won

I think that game was unrated engine game, mottsauce :)

I did beat a FM OTB in a blitz tourney, I've posted that game a few times.

Mate with a pawn on move 11 (? or therabouts) against the Alekhines Defense. Good times....