How many openings do you actually use?

My repertoire: white: Evans gambit, fried liver attack, closed Sicilian, caro kann panov attack, french defence tarrasch defence. Black: najdorf Sicilian, nimzo and queens indian, English opening queens indian variation.

Openings deniers don't seem to notice how just because you run out of book at some point or your opponent deviates it doesn't suddenly make all your opening study irrelevant. The same themes, motifs, positional play and tactics appear in many openings. If you listen to top players commenting as they're streaming you'll find that after running out of book they'll often say "this is a bit like a position in the c3 sicilian" or a "better version of the tarrasch" or something, and they'll know and understand how to play it. The only thing is you should understand why each move is made, and make sure the author is a good one that can explain it.

To be quite honest @Jahtreezy at your level it may be better to just play a narrow repertoire. While I am not significantly stronger than you, it's not entirely justified for me to be comfortable in so many openings. I also don't know theory to move 30 like I do in the ruy lopez in every single line (exaggerating, but some lines do go that far) but ultimately the reason why is because I experimented a lot with trying to find the "right" opening for me. I care a lot about long term improvement because I hope to reach NM someday, and I realized that I stand to learn the most from the white and black side of the ruy lopez, as well as the nimzo-QGD as black. Sidelines are really more for spicing up the game or blitz stuff. It's better to know a repertoire super deep than super broad.

As white i like kings gambit, italian, and ruy lopez but for black i like playing caro kann and sicilian

You nailed the reason why I'm dabbling a bit over the board, taking a half-hour to look at a new opening, and hell, even a reason why I tried the chaturanga/shatranj "variant" (I'm loathe to call the original game a variant, but that's how it's listed on the website). The goal is to expand that comfort range with different pawn structures and positions, and be more able to recognize good mid-game plans.

No harm in learning for either of us, I suppose! Good luck seeking a title, that possibility has passed me by.

Hi! I’m an expert-level player (currently rated around 2200 in blitz) and a chess coach. Over time, I’ve developed a relatively broad repertoire. However, this wasn’t always the case. In my opinion, the number of openings you play should indeed correlate with your chess level. Allow me to delve deeper into this concept, drawing from both my personal experience and the advice I offer my students:

Beginners should be OK with only one central opening as White (1. e4 preferred, but 1.d4 is good too) and symmetrical replies as Black (1...e5 vs 1.e4 and 1...d5 vs. 1. d4). See details on my post: https://www.chess.com/blog/maafernan/openings-for-beginners

Intermediate players may add one or two defenses as Black, and perhaps go deeper in their 1.e4 (or 1 d4) repertoire as White. For further details you could check out my post: https://www.chess.com/blog/maafernan/openings-for-intermediates

Advanced players can explore mainstream hypermodern openings. For instance 1. Nf3 or 1.c4 as White, and 1...Nf6 followed by either 2...e6 or 2...g6 against 1.d4 as Black. And against 1.e4, they could practice a variation of the Sicilian that aligns with their playing style -if they haven´t already.

Experts might choose to either broaden their repertoires or delve deeper into what they know- it is a matter of personal preference and competitive considerations too. Personally, over the last year or two, I've been expanding my repertoire to include less common hypermodern openings and then some universal openings sytems. You can find more details on the following links: https://www.chess.com/blog/maafernan/opening-repertoire-the-nimzowitsch-larsen-attack, https://www.chess.com/blog/maafernan/opening-repertoire-the-modern-defense

https://www.chess.com/blog/maafernan/opening-repertoire-universal-opening-systems

Good luck!

So why do veterans recommend beginners stay away from flank openings like the Sicilian or Caro-Kann?

Those are not flank openings.

As for recommending it, some do and some don't. The Sicilian is actually a pretty straightforward opening with clear and obvious goals and active play. Nothing wrong with that on any level.

How is Sicilian not a flank opening?

It counterattacks the center. It does not necessarily have fianchetto defense setups in mind. In many of the mainline Ruy Lopez variations for Black, the game starts as an open game and ends up with double fianchettos.

The Sicilian is easy to get crushed as black if you haven't bothered learning the theory and white has.

The Caro-Kann is much more beginner friendly. Maybe a bit much for a <500 but otherwise a very good beginner opening.

If both players are beginners, this has a 0% chance. White almost certainly hasn't studied any theory, and especially not for the Sicilian. And even if he had, that's not the end of the world. The chance that a game between beginners is decided in the opening is also roughly 0%.

"how many openings do you play?"

"yes"

i only play

1. E4 

And with black: 1. E5

Dragon?

Isn't that true of most opening gambits, if you don't know the theory?

The Dragon is one line of the Sicilian. I mostly see Najdorfs and others, such as e6 lines and the classical (5. ... Nc6) which has popped out of nowhere, probably some YouTube goon making videos on it.

True, most openings are fine for beginners to play, won't affect the win percentage much, but I don't think it gives a beginner any advantage over other openings assuming they aren't studying much theory.