Is 1...e6 a good opening for beginners?

The only openings that are bad for beginners are bad openings and passive openings like 1...g6, 1...b6, etc.

Nah not really, working only on tactics won't get you a lot past the level that gives you free pieces, around 1500. In order to beat better players you have to have a good understanding of the position and a good gameplan, that usually comes from learning (learning! not memorizing) the openings as much as learning positional ideas.

About 1...e6 - I think it's a great opening for beginners, it's even what I played! You can even read the article I posted on this site when I was 1300 about the French opening:

http://www.chess.com/article/view/french-opening-advenced

That's a refutation of a line, until someone finds a better response/previous moves for the other side, that's how openings evolve.

Talking about refutations the KID is in some problems lately

I learnt the Traxler gambit as well, it's very dangerous for white

The KID has always had some problems, and always will.

I'm thinking of trading in both the Pirc and KID for new openings. The primary contender for 1. e4 is the French.

I'd suggest trying a few different openings out and see which ones feel right for you. Read a bit about each system, play through some games where other people have played the openings, then try them out in practice games and just see what you like best.

One good thing about the French is that you don't have to worry about the attacks on f7 that occur so frequently in the double king pawn games and the Sicilian.  It could give a beginner a good chance to get out of the opening alive and get into a reasonable middle game.  It also gives you experience with pawns chains and pawn breaks like ...c5 and ...f6.

I just received yet another fritztrainer DVD in the mail today. Christmas has been kind this year.

1...e6: A Solid Repertoire - Against 1.d4 and 1.e4 by GM Nigel Davies.

It's obvious that 1...e6 is extremely good against 1.e4, as it's the French Defense. What I didn't know was some of the slick moves Black can play after 1.e4 e6 to avoid some of the more challenging lines in the French Defense. Nigel Davies solves all of those problems that I once had with 1...e6 with some very clever 3rd and 4th moves for Black. 

What about 1.d4 e6? That does sound very strange, and it looks very strange at first. Any guess as to what opening lines Nigel has in mind for Black to play after 1.d4 e6? I'll let everyone ponder that one for a bit...and post later. It's cool stuff.

I'm excited!

I hate the French as white...some people will go out of their way to transpose to it. They can somehow turn a queen's gambit declined into a french!

You'd likely see one of two things, 2.e4 which would put you right back into your french, or 2.c4 which could transpose to just about anything, so it's hard to guess the lines he'll advocate.

1.d4 e6 is often played as a way to go into the Dutch, but as honda said it could be almost anything.

is this a trick answer? if they take the time to get the same skill as you in the middlegame,endgame and tactics and in addition learn the opening better of course they will be better:)

Don't know if I qualify as a beginner since I've been playing for some years ... however I'm certainly not a very strong player (around 1200), and I've experimented with most standard openings and came to the conclusion that I don't like the French as Black. It gives me a cramped position as soon as White advances his e-pawn, I don't know how to get out my knights and other pieces, all of this while my opponent is already developing a kingside attack.

I like the openings most that give me space, an open position and free play for the pieces. I even like to play against the Sicilian as White, somehow I feel well in the resulting positions ... However I often play 1. d4 and the Colle or Colle-Zukertort (but 1. e4 as well), as Black I like 1. e4 e5  or 1. d4 d5 most, I also have come to like the Scandinavian especially against weaker opponents who are not too secure in countering the early queen attacks - though it seems a bit risky against stronger opponents.

Yes, it takes a special breed to play the French Defense.  However the Scandinavian is basically a way to get into a Caro-Kann formation.  The Scandinavian is a little less cramped then the Caro-Kann since the Queen is outside the structure, but it's definately not an opening for those who like space.

Perhaps I should have quoted more of the original post. Birdsopening said, "I think someone can get to Master level knowing just 1 or 2 openings. As long a they have good tactical vision they will make up their opening disadvantage in the middlegame."

If one is going to achieve Master level, one is going to have to play strong players and others of "Master level." To assume that good tactical vision will make up for an opening disadvantage against other players of equal strength struck me as absurd. "Good tactical vision" may make up for an opening disadvantage against a weaker player, but against someone of equal strength, the opening disadvantage will lead to many lost games.

I think the Scandinavian is a pretty solid opening.

The French against sub-1500 players is a whole different animal than against 1800 or better. It can lead to cramped positions, but ones that can be learned. These positions can be a tough nut for a 1200 +/- opponent to crack.

One of the most common responses is the advance variation: 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. e5. If black plays the usual system involving throwing everything at the d4 pawn, the swashbuckler-wannabe white player usually ends up frustrated and often bewildered, finding himself immediately on the defense. Further, innaccurate defense of the d4 pawn can lead to some tactical shots by black that, if not crushing, at least get the black player out of the opening with an advantage.

The exchange variation, 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. exd5 exd5 can lead to more open positions. While at higher levels, these games may have certain characteristics, again at the 1200 - 1500 level, black has usually taken white out of the pet line he wanted to play, and he can proceed to fight it out on more or less equal terms.

If white tries 3. Nc6 or 3. Nd2, the Rubinstein ( 3. ... dxe4) will again open things up, and the problem of developing the queen's bishop is virtually solved.

Minimal preparation for these three lines, such that black has an idea going into it as to how he wants to steer the game, will pay definite dividends. By the time he encounters white players adept at tackling the French, a player should have learned a thing or two more about chess having played these lines, and can choose then to either study them in more depth or learn another opening more suited to his skill and temperment.

I know, because I've been looking at the DVD, and thought about ordering it. I play the French against e4 and Davies chosen defense against 1 d4, 2 c4 is interesting. Unfortunately you still need to deal with the d-pawn sidelines like the Colle, London & Stonewall, though his choice does avoid the Trompowsky.

A beginner shouldn't worry too much about studying openings, especially all the labels. It won't help you to know what is what. Don't make that mistake.

If you're curious about the french then play it but stick to it at least for a while. Consistency is key if you want to develop your chess understanding.

If your opponent plays d4 or c4, why not play e6 also and try to get into similar situations that you're already familar with? This is the way to develop pattern recognition.

From your own experience you will so find out what you like to play, what goes and what doesn't go.

I recommend that you early on start commenting your own games. Just write what you were thinking about and what your ideas were and looking at it now what your ideas are now. You can then share those commented games with stronger opponents and get feedback. It is important to have your own ideas that you can hold up against the ideas of others and compare and refine.

If you just copy what others do and say, you really won't learn that much because it will be without understanding. Developing your understanding is key, no matter where you are rating wise.

The "opening disadvantage" I am talking about isn't really an opening disadvantage, it is the kind of position you can get playing a system with little theory to learn. In these systems you can definitely get a playable position for white or black. Theory is not needed to get a playable middlegame position. Also since you are saving time and energy not studying openings but instead focusing on tactics and endgames, all you have to do is get out of the opening and through the middlegame with an okay position, so then you will be able to outplay them in the endgame. For instance the Colle System is definitely playable, but allows equality. This is the "opening disadvantage" I am talking about, and I bet many people have gone to master level with only the Colle as white.