nWhen to tackle more advaced openings

I was wondering if anyone could help me by letting me know how proficient of a player I should be before adding some of the more advanced openings to my reportoire. I have in mind the French, the Sicilian, and the Ruy Lopez. I'm not exactly a beginner (chesstempo has me at 1650, I have no elo, I'm new here) but I just started studying the openings and most guides I've found have said beginners should try to stick to open games, stick to the italian and the scotch and to save others, like the openings I named and openings that result in closed positions, for later. Assuming I'm decent, is later now? And how much theory is required to make playing them worthwhile?

You think too much. Find an opening you understand a little, like a lot, and just go for it.

I think you are off to the right start - although I don't know if chesstempo is going to give you a good eval of your actual strength.

As White, I think playing both the Ruy and the Italian game are fine- although I wouldn't get too fixated on theory yet. Against the Sicilian I would go for open games and take your beatings, vs the French, petroff, alekhine, pirc etc. choose one system and stick to it for at least a year.

As black stick to classical openings until you can hold your own against 1800s with them. By classical I mean

1. e4 you play e5

1. d4 you play d5.

Most players skip playing the QGD as Black and I think they do that to their own developmental detriment.

Thanks a lot, that's what I was looking for. You recommended that I play one system for games that start with e4 and aren't sicilian or classical, does this pretty much mean KIA or are there other reputable systems out there? I've heard of the colle, and a few others but got the impression people didn't like them.

dont worry too much about these things yet! find your style of play and go with it. at your level playing the spanish or italian can be done without thinking too much about theory (which is VERY deep when you do want to get into it), although Queens Gambit is also very easy to play intuitively and as stated by some gm a 'point machine', its very good for giving white a solid game in which you can make bad (as in not the best) moves and still black has no counterplay! thats much better than e4 which tends to diverge into more sharp but unforgiving lines.

the only thing about playing queens gambit is playing the Benoni but the theory for that is significantly easier than learning how to play the french or variations of the sicilian after e4. so I would recommend d4 to new players as a solid opening.

as for black, I would suggest my own biased pet opening, but its solid, easy, intuitive, and has straightforward theory that isn't too deep: the scandinavian. however playing e5 after e4 is probably the easiest for you. I wouldn't say d5 is easiest after d4, slightly disagree with that poster, because again Queens Gambit is just so solid and gives black a slow painful game (and whites highest winning chances, although more drawish than e4 e5) most of the time especially at low level, unless you learn the benoni and more specifically the benko gambit.

but this is just my general recommendation! Again, find your style and go with it. I quickly developed a love for tactical, sharp games and heavy aggression. In fact when i started learning chess, Kings Gambit was the first opening i learned deeply and employed all lines of; its still up there on my repertoire. Scandinavian is what i used against e4, and benoni is what i always used vs d4. (today i use the dutch and nimzo-indian just as often) 

over the board i am ~1800 uscf so take everything i say in that context.

Thank you guys for all the input. Looks like I'll be sticking to classical openings for a while.

... not to mention Anand playing it with the title on the line and succeeding.

do you know any good books on the subject?