Does anybody know a solid opening for white

Both players define the opening.
Stands.
If you want to personalize it - that's on you.
I haven't got the time for that though.
Going to respond to a different poster now.
'disagreement accepted?'
okay. Sounds good.
I didn't 'troll' though.
If disagreement is 'acccepted' then act like it. 
Follow your own advice. You can have bottom post where you're contradicting yourself.

@blueemu - I liked that game!
When you played your b knight to d7 ... your bishop would'nt have been much use at f5 there anyway.
Regarding black putting his c8 bishop at b7 in any opening - there would be several remarkable issues ... some simpler than others.
----------------------------------------
One of them is that the Larsen seems to be a much better opening than the Owen's.
1) b3 by white in other words - preparing Bb2. Often relates to the f4 move.
Whereas the Owen's is a black
response to e4. 1) e4 b6.
The idea itself isn't bad. Just too early in the game.
And that's more of a factor with black than white.
That's two issues right there.
Plus black might be a lot better with his b-pawn at b5 - often is - with b6 already losing a tempo on that.
So that's three.
------------------------------------
Could a player learn about chess openings by studying different forms of bishop development - with recurrent themes happening even somewhat regardless of what opening it is?
Its bishop-development or absence of it that seems to be the nitty-gritty of critical opening issues.
Other pieces developing - or their roles in each opening - seem to be clearer or easier.

In this forum - the relative value of the pieces is discussed ...
including the scale we're familiar with -with bishops and knights worth about 3 each and rooks 5 and so on.
https://www.chess.com/article/view/chess-piece-value
But as mentioned in that article about Lasker valuing pieces and pawns in the opening - its very different.
rook pawn: ½
knight pawn: 1¼
bishop pawn: 1½
central pawn: 2
knight: 4½
queen bishop: 4½
king bishop: 5
queen rook: 6
king rook: 7
queen: 11

I understand wat ur trying to say but do remember that opening don't matter to 😎Magnus Carlsen.when ur giving a opening for a begginer it is good to give him/her a solid opening like London but when u grow up the rating ladder suddenly there is so much threats in ur position a fully furnished London player might be able to handle situations like queen side pawn push ,black bishop trades but for begginers they r left to mercy of their opponents 😢☠️

How plz explain to me🙏🏼

So u say that playing any garbage opening and having a good middle game will help everyone 😁 weell but It doesn't help me so..... Ur opinion

☠️

Openings r like salt to the food they r not unbeatable but they will significantly help u in the game at the end of the day wat matters is ur thinking skills without which no one can help u

The London has some definite plusses.
So does 1) Nf3 with or without a 'London' to follow.
The word 'London' in these contexts is quite general - since so many early move setups could be a 'London' - 
unlike for example - the Najdorf variation of the Sicilian - where there's a very particular and singular arrangement of the pieces following black's fifth move.
The London does have characteristics though.
White's dpawn is at d4.
White'c c-bishop is at f4.
Those two factors are making the position kind of 'Londonish'?
Yes - but they don't mean by themselves its a 'London'.

"when ur giving a opening for a begginer it is good to give him/her a solid opening like London"
I would think that a master chess coach would do better starting off a student with an opening like the London -
than the Sozin variation of the Najdorf variation of the Sicilian ...
or the finer points of the Torre Attack.
But there's an Enormous amount of controversy about openings ...
putting it mildly!
In fact - the Controversy is so intense that its part of the Competition!
And expressed by the opening moves selections of various players at all levels. By their play as opposed to discussions of openings.
----------
I would say that openings 'do' matter to Magnus Carlsen ...
he uses the London now and then by the way.
------------------
when talking about chess openings - there are controversies within controversies.
And one of them is a claim by many players that the game is 'learned' through the opening - leading to another claim that unless beginners and novices play openings like 1) e4 and responding to it with moves like c5 - that those beginner/novices 'won't learn enough about tactics'.
Many players even seem to not only claim that - but premise it too.
Meaning they regard it as 'the dominant factor' ...
---------------------------
Openings are both controversial and unsolved too - unlike various basic endings - basic checkmate positions - and basic solved tactical sequences ...
which are also part of a player's 'equipment' ...
but in the long run - no matter how much of this equipment a player has - including 'opening knowledge' the issue is still going to depend on players figuring out reasonable and better moves efficiently enough in unfamiliar positions - not familiar ones.

Sorry for my misunderstanding but for rating 400elo openings doesn't exist and the best u can do for urself is not blunder M1 or hang ur queen in the middle of the board 🙏🏼

For a begginer like 400 elo I suggest no opening 😑

I mentioned queens gambit for beginners of 800-1000elo(as per chess.com they r begginers )but for anyone below this rating any developing move will help u 🙂 just make sure u can castle quickly

"For a begginer like 400 elo I suggest no opening"
I kind of agree with this - but I would also recommend 1) Nf3 in that case.
For many reasons.
One of them is that knight is going there anyway.
Whether on move 1 or not - that move by white is overall the most consistently present move in good chess openings.

and @mariapaulraj ...
if you're saying that the blunders at the lowest levels of chess are So Huge that the opening doesn't matter next to that ...
I would tend to agree with you there.
At lower levels - differences in rating can be much bigger and make less difference as compared to higher levels.
Because of so many big tactical mistakes.
But even at the highest levels I still like this idea:
'Mistakes are the Soul of chess' (because even top players don't win unless the other player makes a big enough mistake or mistakes of some kind)
Lots of controversy on that too.

Non-e4 systems
Catalan
Reti
London
Delayed Catalan

e4 systems
Italian Game vs. e5
Vienna Game vs. e5 (to avoid the Petrov)
Exchange French (hehe) vs. French
d4 Nc3 main line vs. Caro-Kann
Closed Sicilian vs. Sicilian
If you want less opening theory though, just try out the first three in the non-e4 systems. 
But of course., opening theory is not that important in your level (except for avoiding the simplest of traps). So, generally, if I were you, I would just follow opening principles and Capablanca the way out of the opening:
1. Control the center with either pawns or pieces (preferably both). Generally, this is achieved by putting a pawn on the center.
2. Develop your pieces towards the center.
3. Don't waste time on random pawn or piece moves unless you have to. A general rule for this is do not move a developed piece twice unless there is something concrete or you have already developed everything else.
3. Do not develop your queen too early (note: not always applicable. Some opening encourage early queen development).
4. Put your king to safety. This is usually achieved with a quick castling.
5. And don't hang pieces and miss basic tactics!

Regarding the four most popular moves for white - on move 1 ...
They are:
1) e4
1) d4
1) Nf3
1) c4.
But even if not played on move 1 - those four moves are played more in early opening play by white - than any of the other 16 first moves.
And Nf3 - towers over the other three in that regard.
Plus those three pawns are moved more than any of white's other five pawns and that's a fact with black too. Whether to their fourth rank or third rank.
Ne2 and Nh3 being very occasionally played instead of Nf3 - including in good play is kind of a cherrypick that fails to contradict the facts about Nf3.
---------------------------------------------
Those four options for move 1 are so good - that they're also the most played moves for black too. Nf6 and d5 and e5 and c5.
Whether on move 1 or during the opening moves generally.
(I didn't specify an order there as to ranking them - unlike with white)
But again - Nf3 is So Good for white - and played So Much in good play - 
that black does it too!
Nf6. You'll find that Nf6 for black towers over those other three options for black - in move frequency.
Whoever could say 'Yes but Nh6 gets played in the Gurgenidze - and Ne7 gets played in some lines ...'
So what? Its diverting from the point that Nf6 is the one that's Very Very preferred in good play.
Nf3 and Nf6 are Huge.

How? Why? Why aren't any of the other three moves for each side prevalent instead?
Well for one - Fact - those other three involve pawns that are often played to the third rank instead of the fourth.
Far far more often than the g-knights are played to anywhere but f3 and f6.
Counter: 'Okay that's obvious - most players know that too - but so what?'
That's next.

If you look at all major opening lines - there are very few where none of white's four most popular choices for move 1 don't get played - and played early. In the first four moves of the game.
For black - you see a few more exceptions ... but generally you're going to see Nf6 or e5 or d5 or c5 played in the first four moves for black.
Why is this true for both white and black?
Because they're the best moves. Is why.
----------------------
Fact: If white opens with 1) e4 or 1) c4 he is allowing black to play an important move immediately ... e5.
Fact: that's in contrast with 1) d4 and 1) Nf3 - which Deter 1) e5 by black.
So those four most popular first moves can be grouped that way.
------------------------------------
Question: can players explain to beginner/novice players as to why the four moves for each side and/or moving the pawns/piece that play them are most popular and most played in good play?
Yes. 
But there might be a zillion different ways players might go about that commentary.
Here's one.
--------------------
Why is 1) d4 played more on move 1 than 1) Nf3 ... ?
They both put the brakes on e5 - so why is d4 favored?
Rationale: d4 also lets white's c-bishop out.
And d4 'takes territory in the center',
Rationale: 'we can play Nf3 later - black can't prevent it -
and having the d-pawn up means black can't come with his e5 pawn to bump our f3 knight with e4'
E-pawns can 'bump' knights at f3 and f6. They do. Another fact.
A lot of opening theory involves black's knight at f6 getting 'bumped'.
Black will often want to maintain a knight at f6 - including in the middlegame not just the opening. 
(Especially if black is short-castled. And he usually is.)
Maintain at f6. For reasons easily discussed. 
That issue constantly comes up in games.

Similiar with white also often wanting to maintain 'a ' knight at f3.
So much so that b-knights being played to d2 and d7 are often used to take back on those squares after bishop takes or knight takes there.
Point: knight placement is often a zillion times easier to discuss than bishop placement.
Relates to 'knights before bishops'. 
Which can be regarded as an idea instead of a 'rule' or 'crutch'.

English opening

This is a one of variation

The Stonewall Attack!

Underrated if you know it.

Matter of fact is all openings are governed by same principles of strategy.

So learn strategy instead to play well in all opening setups.

Stockfish knows no openings, but it knows strategy, and plays all kinds of openings equally well.

All openings are same:

- control of center

- development of pieces

- space advantage

- good piece mobility