Choosing Openings

Assumingbyour chess.com grade reflects your real ability at the moment, my advice would be to focus on things that will allow you to learn and contain not all that many surprises. For example: as Black the 2..., Qxd5 Scandinavian allows one to practice open centre positions and keep a wary eye out for Queen safety against 1. e4, against 1. d4 something like the Queen's Gambit Accepted allows one to explore asymmetric myPawn structures and the value of returning the Pawn for a good position (and refines one's judgement - there are a dew positions in which hanging onto the gambit Pawn for grim death is correct tactically...but if in doubt don't), and against 1. c4 the classical 1..., e5 teaches how to handle closed or semi-closed games in which one has more centre but is facing pressure down the h1-a8 diagonal. My standard idiosyncratic recommendation for improving as White is to try out 1. b3 (the Nimzo-Larsen). If one is to develop into an all-round-proficient player one will sooner or later need to practice handling hypermodern positions, and the Nimzo-Larsen has always struck me as a decent introduction to the ideas. Having said all that, devote at least as much time to middlegame and endgame studies as you do to the opening phase.

My own choices are quite dull and reflect the mistakes I made as a child. Like many people, I hoped there was a "magic bullet winning opening". I was wrong. But I got so familiar with how to play the positions I'm stuck with the openings in question. The one I'll nominate as my favourite is still the King's Gambit. But it requires a shedload of theoretical learning if one is to avoid being wiped out. Aged overb50, I'm still a learner at that one.

I see the KG as trash. In fact, I beat it this past Tuesday night over the board.

And over 50, huh? I join you very soon. A little more than 88 hours from the time of this post, I'll be 50.

@ThrillerFan maybe we should 'debate' the KG over a [virtual] board one day...

...he said with considerable trepidation having seen some of your games and thus gained a distinct impression you'd metagrobolise me however the opening panned out.

Happy 50th to you for a few days' time too. Hope you get to have a great day. I can assure you that 50 is not 'the end'.

The biggest mistake people make is they think the Kings Indian Attack is merely a Reversed Kings Indian Defense with an extra move. It is FAR FROM THAT!

In the KIA, black often plays e6 instead of e5. White far more often pushes h4 rather than f4. Many other nuances occur as well in the KIA.

Also, the KIA is actually very weak unless Black has hemmed in his light-squared Bishop.

The KIA is only good against 2 defenses:

The French Defense - 1.e4 e6 2.d3 d5 3.Nd2 Nf6 4.Ngf3 c5 5.g3 Nc6 6.Bg2 Be7 7.O-O O-O 8.Re1 b5 etc.

e6-Sicilian Lines - 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d3 etc.

Notice in both cases, Black's Bishop his hemmed in behind his pawns. Against other defenses, it's dubious at best!

Only with me as Black. I ain't playing a KG as White any time soon, or ever!

Just for clarity, I am not trying to recommend the King's Gambit to anyone. If I had my time over knowing what I know now (but as Donald Swann once sang, "The wisdom of winter is madness in May") I'd spend my formative years learning something which gave me overall strategic skills like the Ruy Lopez or Queen's Gambit. [Shrugs] Ho-hum.

With White, I tend to play around the Italian type set ups when possible, including the Scotch Gambit at times. As an e4 player, I've got to be ready for alternatives by Black, like the French, Caro, Sicilian, Scandinavian, and so forth, so with not a lot of time to study anymore, I try and focus on one line (where possible) for them (i.e. I really like the Advance French, although it's not considered the best option, it leads to some fun games). However, I also like Bird's Opening for something different. Not something I would recommend to someone starting out, but as I'm nearing 60, and took a shine to it back in the 90s, I still enjoy the positions it can lead to. Mind you, I only play computers online as I prefer playing friends on a real board in friendly games.

I do think the King's Gambit is something all players should learn and play early on, but like RalphHayward alludes to, not something to focus on as a main weapon. But, it does hone one's eye for tactics and opportunities at lower ratings, although eventually it just gets really tough and risky. I only started looking at it and playing it (the King's Bishop Gambit line) a few years ago myself, and while I'm still awful with it, it has led to some really enjoyable games as well. Again, I'm not suggesting it should be someone's main opening, but until one starts getting up around 2000 or more, it really doesn't matter if at the top levels it isn't considered a good choice - the goals are different. At lower levels you can learn a lot about tactics and attacking and how to quickly use a development advantage, and getting that experience and knowledge is good for one's understanding. Gambits can be a lot of fun, but if your aspirations are to get titled and so forth, the time when you can enjoy them is during your learning phase as once you get closer to that goal you're going to find your opponents know the theory and put a wet blanket on the fun stuff.
Anyway, most of the "concerns" about any given opening are really for the GMs to worry about and until one reaches that sort of level, experiment with a range of openings, familiarise yourself with a range of positions, and enjoy yourself.