best opening

See the previous million posts on this same subject:

https://www.chess.com/forum/search?keyword=best+attacking+opening

He didn't ask for the most attacking opening.  He asked for the most "attaching" opening!

The answer, whatever opening floats your boat and you'll be "attached" to it in no time!

In one of his videos Roman Dzindzichashvili mentions the player that is always saying they are an "attacking/sacrificial player" is basically ignorant.  He mentions that you cant just be an "attacking/sacrificing" player, you have to know how to get to and create those positions.  

Obviously not verbatim, but you get the idea.

I am not familiar with his specific video, but I am well aware of what you said.  The following are also comments made by ignorant chess players:

1) Bishops are better than Knights

2) Knights are better than Bishops

3) I don't care what White plays, I will play the Pirc, and I even know a 69 year old clown that hit master for 1 or 2 supplements in the 1980s who keeps on banging on his floor now, and everybody in the state of North Carolina hates him, and yet, he's played 1.d4 d6 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.e4 Bg7 and simply because he played an odd line with an early Bg4, like 5.Nf3 Bg4, he claims he played a Pirc Defense!

4) I am a tactical player

5) I am a positional player

I could go on and on with them.  I play the position on the board.  If it calls for tactics, it calls for tactics.  If it calls for manouvering and patience, that's what it calls for.  One game a Knight may be far superior to the Bishop, and in another, the Bishop may dominate the Knight.

I am not a tactical player, positional player, safe player, aggressive player, passive player, etc.  I'm what you call a CHESS PLAYER!

Amazes me how stupid most people are!

Amen!

The best piece of advice i give people to to play the board.  As soon as someone starts with any of that BS you mentioned, thats all i need to know.  I played a kid this past January, and after he agreed to an obvious draw, he tells me that he should have won because i didnt play the correct theory in the opening.  I told him you play theory, ill play good moves.

^^ Good answer, that kid was very rude. Btw, I also do not know much theory and in some openings get an equal or slightly worse (according to the engine) position because the plans are familiar to me.

He was young.  He also showed up 20 minutes late, and proceeded to act like he was 'bored".  Layed his head on the table, put his "hoodie" on to try and appear all dark and sinister.  Looked around like he wasnt interested.  Probably thought its an old guy this i wll be easy.  When he realized it wasnt going to be easy, he took the game serious.  And then after the draw, he busted out the "opening theory" excuse.  Either his parents are instilling bad habits in him by trying to play the psychology card, or they arent dong there job as parents.

Now I realize, how old was he? Young is a matter of perspective, I am 18 years old.

18 is legally an adult, this kid was about 10.

An identification of the most attacking openings would not be very useful, because other factors tend to play a large role in one's opening choices. Here is one example of how a book advocated a particular opening:

"... A major selling point, which cannot be overstressed is that the Kan is one of the easiest variations of the Sicilian to learn, unlike some of the more high profile lines I could mention (the Dragon, the Najdorf and the Sveshnikov), the onus is not on the player with the black pieces to memorise reams of opening theory simply to stay on the board. Of course Black still has to play good moves, but it is much less likely to be at 'disadvantage' simply down to a memory loss. ..." - GM John Emms (2002)

https://web.archive.org/web/20140627033203/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen46.pdf

Indeed, many factors are involved in the best choice for any one player.

"Each player should choose an opening that attracts him. Some players are looking for a gambit as White, others for Black gambits. Many players that are starting out (or have bad memories) want to avoid mainstream systems, others want dynamic openings, and others want calm positional pathways. It’s all about personal taste and personal need.

For example, if you feel you’re poor at tactics you can choose a quiet positional opening (trying to hide from your weakness and just play chess), or seek more dynamic openings that engender lots of tactics and sacrifices (this might lead to more losses but, over time, will improve your tactical skills and make you stronger)." - IM Jeremy Silman (January 28, 2016)

Also, perhaps look at:

https://www.chess.com/article/view/picking-the-correct-opening-repertoire

http://chess-teacher.com/best-chess-openings/

https://www.chess.com/blog/TigerLilov/build-your-opening-repertoire

https://www.chess.com/blog/CraiggoryC/how-to-build-an-opening-repertoire

For someone seeking help with choosing openings, I usually bring up Openings for Amateurs by Pete Tamburro (2014).

http://kenilworthian.blogspot.com/2014/05/review-of-pete-tamburros-openings-for.html

I believe that it is possible to see a fair portion of the beginning of Tamburro's book by going to the Mongoose Press site.

https://www.mongoosepress.com/excerpts/OpeningsForAmateurs%20sample.pdf

Perhaps adrianchessfagan would also want to look at Discovering Chess Openings by GM John Emms (2006).

https://web.archive.org/web/20140627114655/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen91.pdf

Member Since: Nov 6, 2013

Bullet Total Games:1,657

Blitz Total Games:  1,655  

G30 Total Games:    24

3 Days Per Move Total Games:3 

26 Tactics

0 Chess Mentor

There is nothing here that says the OP is serious about improving.  They are just looking to sound agressive/tactical.  

The Sicilian Defense.

-Warren Buffett