Chess openings for beginners/ kids

Mr X,

Please read my first comment in this thread so that you understand the argument. It precedes your first post.

I recomment the Italian, King's Gambit, and Spanish.

If you want something too complex, then teach the KIA or some other quiet positional opening.

Capablanca (Chess Fundamentals) puts basic opening principles third behind endings and tactics. But, his model games are a mix of old lines and those current in his day. Unlike most who post here he is not a dogmatist. Euwe (Development of Chess Style) argues that a player's development should follow chess history. He starts with Greco and Philidor. The King's Gambit is prominent, as is the Italian.

I have a student who learned the Colle from an older relative. He played it against another student of mine in a tournament this weekend. Neither player had the faintest understanding of the position, but the stronger tactician reached a better position before making errors that let the other equalise. They agreed to a draw in an unbalanced position. They tied for first in their section. The student who won first on tiebreaks (the stronger tactician of the two) usually plays either the Italian or the Spanish. The tactician also faced 1.g3 in one of his games this weekend. He outplayed his opponent tactically. Again, neither player demonstrated positional understanding commensurate with the position.

I showed both students other model games in the Colle and then redirected their focus to basic tactics. 

I think that what is "proven" in this exchange is that you read selectively. Does your comprehension of the quoted sentence include the meaning of the word BEFORE?

Now, go back and read post#10. All of it. Don't argue with me about the Italian until you understand where we agree and where we disagree.

The best thing kids can learn to do with the chess pieces is not swallow them.

Well... in theory, one can teach KIA, or pretty much anything else, to a kid. All you have to do is teaching some rather advanced positional concepts, like cotrolling the center with pieces, and light/ dark squared stategy. Without that knowledge, playing stuff like the KIA will be nothing more than a comedy of errors.

The problem actually is: How the heck you will manage to make the kid understand the KID, KIA, or other complex positional concepts, if his majesty, yourself in person can barely understand them?

In the lower rating ranges attack is generally prefered over defense, so for a new player (child or adult alike) open games tend to be both more practical and are more fun to play than semi-open or closed games.

People advising the Italian Game are probably spot on about the practice of open games. It combines pretty much all opening essentials in the first few moves. Despite analyzed to offer White no major advantage, it usually gives Black an uncomfortable game for quite some time during the opening and has attacking potential.

Mind to note that for children the attention scope to openings is usually limited. Just stick to the principles and some clearcut examples rather than to overanalyze a system; once you notice they truly enjoy improving, going beyond principles is possible.

Thx for the book recommendation. I have chess fundamental by Capablanca and will start with it.

Well it seems after looking at what you posted.

The only disagreements we have is with the above text which I have highlighted in red text.

Judging from the above text in red, I feel you have no agruement.

You are simply wrong.

It seems like a pretty open & closed case to me.

I wish you wasn't wrong.

However, I read your text and can't find any logical rational to consider it right.

The Kings Gambit and the Ruy Lopez are the most complex openings in all of chess.

You are trying to teach a beginner these lines when they should be starting off with simpler lines.

The Italian Game, Colle, London System, & Kings Indian Attack are simple lines.

Frankly, I don't even see how you believe the Kings Indian Attack is complex?

What is so complexed about the above position?

You will reach this position 95% of the time no matter what move black plays.

You can give black tons of different mainline moves and white's position will be the same 95% of the time.

The KIA is an opening which really trys to bypass the opening phase of the game to reach the middle game phase in a equal-ish position.

The Opening line is very simple which is why it doesn't get played in high level a lot.

It is a very solid line, but it is not considered demanding.

It places no real pressure on black.

It allows black to develop as they wish.

Reaching equal-ish middle game positions.

As for your last statement I would like clarification:

...then teach the KIA or some other quiet positional opening...

From the way I am reading and interpreting what you are saying here.

It sounds as if you believe the KIA is a positional opening?

I will wait for your response before commenting on that.

I believe everyone in chess will one day need to learn the Queens Gambit & Ruy Lopez.

For they are the Rolls Royce of chess openings.

They both carry high tactical and positional motifs.

Even though these 2 lines should be considered a long term life chess goal.

You should not be seeking to accomplish both of these as a beginner?

Baby steps!

You have to do baby steps!

You can not challenge the World Boxing Champion if you don't even know how to jab?

Why would a beginner try to learn the Ruy Lopez( An opening which has been played by like every Title player) when they don't even know how to castle?

I believe you are wrong.

Furthermore, I have nothing esle to say about your text.

Just because you can develop your pieces in a certain way every single game, doesn't mean the reuslting positions aren't complex.

We are talking about the Opening phase.

We are not talking about middle game and endgame positions.

If you are going to run under the assumption of middle game and endgame positions.

Than that rules out the Kings Gambit & Ruy Lopez's resulting positions completely!

Those openings have piece contact. You can explain White's Bb5, indirectly pressuring e5 fairly easily. The KIA is more quiet and subtle. Plus, why would we not be talking about the resulting positions...as far as I know, there's generally a middlegame after the opening...

Well this is a chess opening forum.

The OP is looking for easy to learn chess openings for a beginner/kid.

Thus, I gave him easy & simple opening.

Honestly people considering the KIA complex seems laughable to me.

People are trying to say the KIA is complex in the middle game.

However, the same agruement can be made for all chess openings in the middle game.

Which is why the middle game is a completely different phase.

Which is considered complexed in the majority of cases.

It requires middle game planning skills.

"... Beginning players will always get wiped out by more experienced opponents. ... the Barcza Opening ... [is one of the openings that] I recommend. ... White's four opening moves, 1. Nf3, 2. g3, 3. Bg2, and 4. 0-0, create the Barcza Opening. ... if White plays for d2-d3 and e2-e4, the opening becomes a King's Indian Attack (KIA). The KIA became my favorite because the ideas are quite easy to grasp. ... Certainly, by adopting the Barcza Opening as White, you will cut out a number of losses that you would experience by playing complicated classical openings. Your need to know the theoretical lines is reduced ..." - GM Yasser Seirawan (1998)

Don't teach a kid to play any lines. Teach them to play good moves. If they don't understand why it's good (able to explain it, apply it to new problems, etc.) then they shouldn't play it.

I like the Colle, both the Zucertort and Kalanowski.s It's a solid opening that's really easy to memorize and very versatile. I have always had good results with it.

I am satisfied with the response of jengaias in support of my position that KIA is complex. He hits the main points that I would hit.

The positional ideas in the Italian, King's Gambit, and Ruy Lopez are far easier to teach beginners of any age.

I will grant that after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.O-O Nxe4 5.d4 Nd6 6.Bxc6 dxc6 7.dxe4 Nf5 8.Qxd8+ Kxd8, the relative merits of 9.Nc3, 9.Rd1+, and 9.h3 are complex enough to give beginners trouble.

Jengaias you are incorrect!

You and Ziryab both seem to be wandering off into a bad path.

I honestly don't even know how I can help you get back onto the good path.

Everything your saying is simply wrong.

The below statement is incorrect:

KIA is a very deep opening system with a lot of very complex positional concepts.

The Kings Indian Attack & Kings Indian Defense have never been classifed as complex positional opening.

Granted there are some positional elements to these lines just like every line in chess has positional elements.

However, they have never been considered positional.

They have always been considered dynamic & tactical.

In fact, positionally the KIA and the KID are considered highly questionable openings because they don't fight for space.

The KIA & KID surrender space in order to generate caveman-ish king side attacks!

The name itself is a tip off to what the line is!

Kings Indian Attack

It does King side attacks by throwing up the king side pawns!

Have you honestly ever seen a positional player do this?

Surrender space to do caveman-ish king side attacks?

A positional player would never do this in a million years.

They try to squeeze people.

They don't do questionable attacks.

Name a positional player who plays the KIA or KID?

Anatoly Karpov?

Adolf Anderssen?

Tigran Petrosian?

In fact, Tigran Petrosian said he made his living off of KID players!

Positional players would never play these lines!

In fact, When Magnus Carlsen was a teenager at the age of 13.

He use to have an attacking style.

He played the KID!

When he got older which is now a days he has stopped playing the KIA & KID.

Magnus Carlsen style has kind of mellowed out I think.

He is more of a positional type of a player now.

Name players who play the KIA or KID?

Tal

Garry Kasparov

Bronstein

Bobby Fischer

Hikaru Nakamura

Jobava

Do these players even sound like positional players?

I think people on this forum are confused.

You guys need to go back on the right path!

I've heard the KIA recommended to new-ish players before.

I've always disagreed.