Skynet wrote:
Bump.
It is a bit hard to believe that you still have the same issue 3 years later.
Best first opening repertoire for beginners to improve
Sort:
Danish
MariaMilk14569 wrote:
Danish
dubious, no
Jul 24, 2023
0
#105
The best way to find the best opening for beginners is to play a good amount of games with all of the solid openings. And then pick the one that suits the beginner's playing style and try to develop in that opening. This is not great in short term development, but it will be great long term.
Aug 6, 2023
0
#107
dannyhume написал:
The most consistent answers I have seen to this question are:
a) No repertoire until you are 1900 FIDE or double that in tactics, just opening principles until then.
-and-
b) 1.e4 as White. Classical repertoire as Black, playing 1...e5 against 1.e4 and 1...d5 against 1.d4, with many vouching for the QGD as Black.
Beyond move 1 whether White or Black in the open games (1.e4 e5) or move 2 (QGD) in queen’s pawn openings, advice gets murkier.
For instance, is the descriptor next to each of the following openings below a good reason to play or a good reason not to play the particular opening for the learner you are referring to?
1) Ruy Lopez: strategical/theoretical complexity
2) Scotch Gambit: concrete
3) Four Knights as White / Petroff as Black: simple
The answers I have heard to the last several questions in your opening post are:
Mainlines, classical, open, tactical, and yes.
The real reason for my post, however, is ... following.
a) No repertoire until you are 1900 FIDE or double that in tactics, just opening principles until then.
-and-
b) 1.e4 as White. Classical repertoire as Black, playing 1...e5 against 1.e4 and 1...d5 against 1.d4, with many vouching for the QGD as Black.
Beyond move 1 whether White or Black in the open games (1.e4 e5) or move 2 (QGD) in queen’s pawn openings, advice gets murkier.
For instance, is the descriptor next to each of the following openings below a good reason to play or a good reason not to play the particular opening for the learner you are referring to?
1) Ruy Lopez: strategical/theoretical complexity
2) Scotch Gambit: concrete
3) Four Knights as White / Petroff as Black: simple
The answers I have heard to the last several questions in your opening post are:
Mainlines, classical, open, tactical, and yes.
The real reason for my post, however, is ... following.
Man opening theory is making my rating stay afloat, Pretty much the only reason i have a actually good rating.
If i used opening principles untill then i would have never gotten stronger.
Badchesserrr wrote:
dannyhume написал:
The most consistent answers I have seen to this question are:
a) No repertoire until you are 1900 FIDE or double that in tactics, just opening principles until then.
-and-
b) 1.e4 as White. Classical repertoire as Black, playing 1...e5 against 1.e4 and 1...d5 against 1.d4, with many vouching for the QGD as Black.
Beyond move 1 whether White or Black in the open games (1.e4 e5) or move 2 (QGD) in queen’s pawn openings, advice gets murkier.
For instance, is the descriptor next to each of the following openings below a good reason to play or a good reason not to play the particular opening for the learner you are referring to?
1) Ruy Lopez: strategical/theoretical complexity
2) Scotch Gambit: concrete
3) Four Knights as White / Petroff as Black: simple
The answers I have heard to the last several questions in your opening post are:
Mainlines, classical, open, tactical, and yes.
The real reason for my post, however, is ... following.
a) No repertoire until you are 1900 FIDE or double that in tactics, just opening principles until then.
-and-
b) 1.e4 as White. Classical repertoire as Black, playing 1...e5 against 1.e4 and 1...d5 against 1.d4, with many vouching for the QGD as Black.
Beyond move 1 whether White or Black in the open games (1.e4 e5) or move 2 (QGD) in queen’s pawn openings, advice gets murkier.
For instance, is the descriptor next to each of the following openings below a good reason to play or a good reason not to play the particular opening for the learner you are referring to?
1) Ruy Lopez: strategical/theoretical complexity
2) Scotch Gambit: concrete
3) Four Knights as White / Petroff as Black: simple
The answers I have heard to the last several questions in your opening post are:
Mainlines, classical, open, tactical, and yes.
The real reason for my post, however, is ... following.
Man opening theory is making my rating stay afloat, Pretty much the only reason i have a actually good rating.
If i used opening principles untill then i would have never gotten stronger.
If you had used opening principles and studied tactics, middlegames, and endgames, you would probably be ~50 points weaker now but 100-200 points stronger a year from now. Openings are a bandaid solution for bad play.
Aug 6, 2023
0
#109
Ethan_Brollier написал:
Badchesserrr wrote:
dannyhume написал:
The most consistent answers I have seen to this question are:
a) No repertoire until you are 1900 FIDE or double that in tactics, just opening principles until then.
-and-
b) 1.e4 as White. Classical repertoire as Black, playing 1...e5 against 1.e4 and 1...d5 against 1.d4, with many vouching for the QGD as Black.
Beyond move 1 whether White or Black in the open games (1.e4 e5) or move 2 (QGD) in queen’s pawn openings, advice gets murkier.
For instance, is the descriptor next to each of the following openings below a good reason to play or a good reason not to play the particular opening for the learner you are referring to?
1) Ruy Lopez: strategical/theoretical complexity
2) Scotch Gambit: concrete
3) Four Knights as White / Petroff as Black: simple
The answers I have heard to the last several questions in your opening post are:
Mainlines, classical, open, tactical, and yes.
The real reason for my post, however, is ... following.
a) No repertoire until you are 1900 FIDE or double that in tactics, just opening principles until then.
-and-
b) 1.e4 as White. Classical repertoire as Black, playing 1...e5 against 1.e4 and 1...d5 against 1.d4, with many vouching for the QGD as Black.
Beyond move 1 whether White or Black in the open games (1.e4 e5) or move 2 (QGD) in queen’s pawn openings, advice gets murkier.
For instance, is the descriptor next to each of the following openings below a good reason to play or a good reason not to play the particular opening for the learner you are referring to?
1) Ruy Lopez: strategical/theoretical complexity
2) Scotch Gambit: concrete
3) Four Knights as White / Petroff as Black: simple
The answers I have heard to the last several questions in your opening post are:
Mainlines, classical, open, tactical, and yes.
The real reason for my post, however, is ... following.
Man opening theory is making my rating stay afloat, Pretty much the only reason i have a actually good rating.
If i used opening principles untill then i would have never gotten stronger.
If you had used opening principles and studied tactics, middlegames, and endgames, you would probably be ~50 points weaker now but 100-200 points stronger a year from now. Openings are a bandaid solution for bad play.
Im doing all that except im not using opening principles, Im just using opening prep. And im improving!
@Skynet, my answer would be: why make them choose only one? Tell them to play anything and everything so as to not limit their exposure to various positions. As White, they should play e4 and d4, but also everything else to reverse engineer why certain openings are better than others. As Black, the should play the Sicilian/Open Game and Indian/Closed Game, but also everything else to figure out again why some openings are good and some are bad. This approach for ~5000 15|10 games, combined with a healthy infusion of opening principles (no theory until 1900+ FIDE, only starting positions) should teach beginners everything they need to know about openings. In the meantime, they can more actively study tactics, middlegames, and endgames.
Badchesserrr wrote:
Ethan_Brollier написал:
Badchesserrr wrote:
dannyhume написал:
The most consistent answers I have seen to this question are:
a) No repertoire until you are 1900 FIDE or double that in tactics, just opening principles until then.
-and-
b) 1.e4 as White. Classical repertoire as Black, playing 1...e5 against 1.e4 and 1...d5 against 1.d4, with many vouching for the QGD as Black.
Beyond move 1 whether White or Black in the open games (1.e4 e5) or move 2 (QGD) in queen’s pawn openings, advice gets murkier.
For instance, is the descriptor next to each of the following openings below a good reason to play or a good reason not to play the particular opening for the learner you are referring to?
1) Ruy Lopez: strategical/theoretical complexity
2) Scotch Gambit: concrete
3) Four Knights as White / Petroff as Black: simple
The answers I have heard to the last several questions in your opening post are:
Mainlines, classical, open, tactical, and yes.
The real reason for my post, however, is ... following.
a) No repertoire until you are 1900 FIDE or double that in tactics, just opening principles until then.
-and-
b) 1.e4 as White. Classical repertoire as Black, playing 1...e5 against 1.e4 and 1...d5 against 1.d4, with many vouching for the QGD as Black.
Beyond move 1 whether White or Black in the open games (1.e4 e5) or move 2 (QGD) in queen’s pawn openings, advice gets murkier.
For instance, is the descriptor next to each of the following openings below a good reason to play or a good reason not to play the particular opening for the learner you are referring to?
1) Ruy Lopez: strategical/theoretical complexity
2) Scotch Gambit: concrete
3) Four Knights as White / Petroff as Black: simple
The answers I have heard to the last several questions in your opening post are:
Mainlines, classical, open, tactical, and yes.
The real reason for my post, however, is ... following.
Man opening theory is making my rating stay afloat, Pretty much the only reason i have a actually good rating.
If i used opening principles untill then i would have never gotten stronger.
If you had used opening principles and studied tactics, middlegames, and endgames, you would probably be ~50 points weaker now but 100-200 points stronger a year from now. Openings are a bandaid solution for bad play.
Im doing all that except im not using opening principles, Im just using opening prep. And im improving!
I don’t think that’s as a result of your opening prep. You’ve gained 250 rapid points in the last month. You haven’t yet reached an accurate ELO, so any perceived improvement is likely as a result of simply playing players worse than you regularly.
First do not say Elo here. There is only Ccom rating points here. Completely different and much lower.
Beginners shuld follow basic chess rules. As white 1.d4 with a stake in the centre. Then develop the king side pieces and castle and then the queen side pieces. As black 1e5 1d5 1c5 with a stake in the centre and the same piece development order. Pawn moves first at a minimum 1d4 e3 for developing bishop the same for black d5e6 e5d6 and 1c5e6d6. Keep the pieces guarded. Folowing these sound starting rules gives automaticly the starting openings needed with very few adjustments. From there on always lock out for threats and they will have a good start.
Aug 12, 2023
0
#113
While not a beginner now (I only just started playing again after a very long time away) I would recommend the following two books to build an opening repertoire around: Keep it Simple 1.e4 and Keep it Simple for Black by Christof Sielecki. Both are aimed at beginners (and more experienced players) and give simple but clear lines to follow.
If you want something else to compliment or sharpen your openings as white, then have a look at the chessable course on the Vienna game as it has lots of potential for pitfalls and traps for your opponents.
For me personally, I find being able to analyse my games (every single one) after playing a game a true game changer and well worth the chess.com subscription.
danish gambit, italian/ruy with g6, englund gambit
no gambits for newbies, they dont know how to play gambits so theyre just gonna be a pawn down
yeah that’s the joke. GothamChess thinks anyone under 2000 can’t handle the Ruy Lopez and then he tells 100s to start playing gambit lines
that is pretty funny, literally the opposite of what i recommend lol