need white opening for a begginer

hey everyone,

i'm a beginner chess player who wanna improve in the game so i'll apperciate any help espicially " openings for white " .

thx in advance

the English its flexible controls the center and it allows you to develop your pieces classicaly or in the hypermodern style

It really depends on what your opponent plays after you choose 1.e4 or 1.d4 or 1.c4

Well, if you want a basic opening for white, you probably want to aim for something in which knowledge of general ideas is more important than specific move orders. In this case, I would recommend the King's Indian Attack, often referred to as the KIA. The general formation looks like this:

"But wait", you might be thinking. "Why hasn't black moved any pieces?" The fact is, the KIA is an opening 'system'. This means that it can be played whatever black does. Usually this is reached by first Nf3, g3, Bg2, and O-O, and only then moving on to d3, Nd2, e4, b3, Bb2, etc. But move order isn't really important here. The important thing is getting to the formation in whatever way you can. In the KIA, white's development isn't really very ambitious, but it is very solid. He usually ends up getting a kingside attack, while his own king remains quite safe. Sometimes white will aim to advance his e pawn further up the board, sometimes he will play for an f pawn advance. Try playing through a few master games (yes, even people like Bobby Fischer have played this opening) to get the feel of how white usually develops, some of the things black does in response, where the pieces usually go, and what white usually aims for after he is finished development. Best of luck!

the above poster had a good contribution, but i should point out that the KIA doesnt necessarily include the queenside fianchettod bishop. Alot of times white plays to the kingside, and the bishop just goes through the d2 diagonal.

I say try the Lo

I like hankm's contribution.  The Ruy Lopez is also a solid opening.

One word of caution:  You always ignore your opponent's moves at your own peril!

In my opinion the openings already presented are a bit too solid/positional for a beginner. The usual advice is to start with some sort of romantic "time for material" gambit (my personal suggestion is the "modern" danish 1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 and tha smith-morra against the sicilian) , since you can't play solidly when you're unable to calculate tactics. I have often seen d-pawn specials like the London or the Colle handled by beginners. The usual result is a mass exchange in the early moves, randomly played endgame, one side misses a simple tactic and loses. I have noticed much faster improvements in those who played gambit stuff, initially collecting tons of losses but gradually developing superior tactical skills.

Both the danish and the morra can be played almost without theory at beginner level: just remember to bring your pieces out fast and aim at your opponent king. This is my personal suggestion. 

If you are a beginner,  one off the best things to do is studying tactics.To get as many tactics in the opening as possible you best start with 1.e4 or 1.d4 develop as many pieces as soon as possible and open files.

Whilst the above approach is likely to get you to lose many games against better opponents it also lets you improve your tactics fast

Also important to improve are studying endgames. You might face not much in the beginning of your chesslife. But studying endgames lets you learn specific patterns off pieces in isolation. Checkmating with 2 B's for example learns you a lot  about how the B-pair can work together. Also having more endgame knowledge leads to understanding more about the positions in the middlegame. You know more positions wich are favorable to trade down to for example.

My advice: Learn some general openingideas or perhaps a few opening systems  and leave the deeper openingtheory and lines until your tactics and endgametechnique are brushed up.

I know this might sound weird coming from an e4 player, but I recommend you learn the queen's gambit first. It is a solid opening and it will teach you great positional skills. One variation might go like this:

totally agree.

Indeed, tactics should be the focus for any beginner, as the vast majority of games played at amateur level are decided by tactics. Of course, positional considerations are extremely important as well, and are an important part of chess (players with no positional knowledge are usually eaten alive at any level). When I refer to "positional knowledge", I mean not just subtle maneuvering, but also simple concepts like developing your pieces and trying to place them in squares when the control more space. As a matter of fact, combinative play (which, generally speaking, includes tactics) is rather difficult if one has badly placed pieces and a weak king. Endgames also have a massive role at any level: in amateur play, it does no good to get into an obviously winning endgame (Q and K vs. K, for instance) and have no idea how to perform the checkmate. Finally, opening knowledge has great importance at any level: if you get a bad position from the start, you are never really giving yourself a fair chance to exhibit your middlegame and endgame skills. True, one shouldn't spend a great deal of time studying opening theory at beginner level, as beginner games usually depart from theory very quickly, so I feel that a "system" might not be a bad consideration, because it majorly cuts down on the theoretical knowledge necessary. No knowledge of theory works fine against opponents of equal skill, but against stronger opponents, you will likely find yourself playing the middlegame with a huge disadvantage, if you make it to the middlegame at all.

+1

1.e4 leads to classical development and will help you learn all the solid fundamentals while at the same time seeing many types of positions.  It's important to be able to play varied positions because it makes you a well rounded and flexible player... meaning if your opponent errors you'll be able to head for punishment instead of avoiding a good position because "I don't like IQP positions" or "I don't like having to attack on the K/Q side" etc.

If your only comfortable in one type of position, then your opponent can make all sorts of errors (that you're too afraid to punish) and he'll end up with a much better position.

I don't know if I'd call my style positional... but I'd definitely call it a bit lazy :)  I mean... who wouldn't rather get a strategically winning game (requires little calculation) vs a tactical game where you have to calculate a lot!

ajedrecito:

Fair enough. Most of what you say is perfectly true about most amateurs (including myself )

Systems are essentially "lazy" openings. If a beginner wants to play serious chess, he should probably start with 1. e4, which will help him in the long run. If he starts with a system, it will undoubtedely be easier and save him some early losses based on insufficent opening knowledge, but it won't help his growth as much. Nevertheless, I have heard some well known players/authors recommend the KIA for beginners to avoid theory , (Yasser Seirawan, for one).

Though I must say, knowledge of opening theory and particularly general opening principles is helpful, especially when beyond about 1400 USCF, and it certainly should be studied before 1900-2000. Sometimes, the "correct" move can be very difficult to find in an unfamiliar opening, and many far-from-obvious pitfalls exist which a player with little opening knowledge can fall into. Knowledge of theory enables you to move quickly and confidently through the opening phase and save valuable time for middlegame planning. And indeed, it is better to spend a great deal of time seriously planning in the middlegame than desperately trying to play the most accurate moves in the opening which often yield only a minimal advantage.

Put a pawn in the center (eg, e2-e4).  Try to play the other central pawn out 2 squares, ie, d2-d4 (unless the opponent stopped you).  Play your knights out toward the center.  Develop your king bishop to a good square like c4.  Castle short or play your queen bishop out.  Move your queen up to connect the rooks.  Centralize the rooks.  Look for an active pawn break and attack, since u r White.  In king-pawn openings the most common pawn break to play for is d2-d4; the other common break is f2-f4.

Opponents at your same level will confuse themselves in some complicated opening of their choosing, and you will dominate them in the center.  The biggest hurdle is to get over the opening "FEAR" that is so common among weak players.  Fear of being out of book, fear of being down a pawn, fear of a 1400 player's opening book knowledge (lol), fear of doubled or isolated pawns (often not a bad thing at all), fear of tactical positions (which u should be aiming for!).  This fear leads many timid souls to take up some kind of solid "system" like a Colle or London system or whatever...

Thanks to all who have offered advise. I mostly hang around "square one", sometimes moving up but then go back to square one again. I don't always understand what is being offered here in the forum, but have picked up some good tips. One tip that really threw me was, its okay to lose, learn from it, well, I lose lots of times, too many times I don't understand what my opponent did to me, except the obvious loss they tagged on me. I actually think I might be getting better, sure I dropped my queen yesterday, but I reviewed after my loss and noted what I should of done. Again, thanks to all who try to help out with us beginners.

How bout the italian game or the Ruy Lopez bothe are great

I hope the "big boys" will answer the above question, I'm not liking that position too much.

My advice to you raba7. 1st what type of life you like, fast, you like lazy, you like adventure. Then go from there.  1. Any Gambit will test your tactics, as everyone has pointed out that tactics will get you to the next step. Write down your move's when you find what opening you like. The opening should take you to a playable middle game that your not down a piece.