Opening problem

I seem to have a problem on my opening game, if I am to lose a game, this is where I probably crack, during the beginning. I usually play a defensive game to start off, but during the starting exchange sometimes im down by a pawn, and after the exchange, sometimes the position of my pieces aren't what I'd call a good defensive game, or at least a good start. I usually play a Sicilian defense and some variations, and Im quick to capture at least 1 enemy knight, usually with the Ruy Lopez. What do you think?

how bout the good ol kings gambit no one expects it

The ruy lopez is a complicated opening, as is the sicilian. While your other advices I completely agree on, advising a chess player not to focus so much on the spanish game, and choosing other openings instead, doesn't seem very wise. I personally believe that any chess player who takes their chess seriously, should definetely know how to play the basics of the ruy lopez. 

Didn't I clearly say the basics of the ruy lopez? Does one person has to know the myriad variations of the ruy lopez, for them to play it?And do you believe this guy actually plays against people who have this knowledge, who know all the variations? You don't have to be a expert on the ruy lopez to be able to play a decent game of chess using it! There is a reason why is so famous for being a good, sound opening for white to use. Why not play it? 

I repeat, does one have to know all the possible variations of a opening, to be able to play it? Using your way of thinking, one shouldn't play any single opening, if one doesn't know all the possible variations of it. We should just moves the pieces and pawns randomly and hope for the best. And please explain this to me:

1. e4 d6

2.d4 Nf6

3.Nc3 g6...... I am now ready to win??

 

 

 

@Rosequeen

If your tactical ability is lacking, then you should be playing tactical openings. If your tactics fail, then you will lose games due to that. Why play boring, system openings like the Colle?

If you play tactical openings/tactically, your tactics ability will rise. You shouldn't evade the problem by playing something insanely boring/unambitious to avoid tactics.

That being said, the Sicilian is a very tactical opening but it has other more complex positional aspects to it as well. Play 1...e5 vs. 1.e4 and as white you could try the KG, Scotch, Italian, Evans, and more if you aren't ready for a Ruy yet. Point is, don't avoid tactics, the basis for other stuff like positional chess. I think it was Steintz or someone that said tactics flow from superior positions. But how will you make use of this positional advantage without a solid grasp of tactics?

We are talking about what seems to be a beginner's game. I am sure that theoritical mistakes on some of the spanish's lines wont bother him that much ( plus most of his opponents wouldnt be knowledgable enough to know!). I could sensibly say that any occasional chess player, or one who enjoys playing online tend to play against similar level/ or slightly better players ( or even worse, but that's not the point). There isn't any theoritical battle going on. If the dude enjoys playing it (which he seems to do arleady) would it be a bad idea to stick with it, play a couple of hundred  games with it? I am sure he will grasp the basic lines of the most common variations of the ruy lopez, while at the same time improving his tactics. While I do agree with most things you have said, I am sure that no harm will be brought if he played one of the most common chess openings that exist. He's definitely NOT going to get lost in a labyrinth of tactical mazes as you say. 

LavaRook's right. The only way to get better at something is to do it as much as you can. Tactics are not something you can avoid, whatever opening you choose, so its best to go ahead and learn by challenging that part of your brain.

Ok, say he does tactical training exercises (which I agree he should also do)...

Many tactics are easier to find in an 'exercise' than they are OTB. You need to prove your tactical ability, not just by doing a bunch of problems. Just how much were all of these problems worth in terms of solid improvement? Have to prove it in a real game.

You get better at tactics by playing tactically. You get better at swimming by swimming more often. Playing 1.e4 leads to far more tactical games where you can practice your tactics than a Colle does. AND if he is playing defensively, it seems like playing an aggressive opening like the KG will force him to think/plan actively.

Now if he's dropping pieces, thats a simple tactic. It can easily be fixed-why it is so hard for some people I don't quite know but it doesn't take much effort to avoid dropping pieces straight up.

My advice is for LONG-TERM improvement. You see more tactical patterns if you play tactical stuff. Even if you lose, theres more learning. Beginners improve fastest through tactics.

and think about what the other person could do in responce to your move and make biger threats than he makes for example if he points his Bishop towards an unprotected knight, then point one of yours straight towards his Rook or queen, with the last make sure its guarded so you dont lose it for nothing

Thanks to everyone for the advice, appreciate it. P.S. The piece dropping thing I think y'all interpreted it the wrong way XD It doesn't happen because I dont know what Im doing, rather they are part of a sacrificial startegies, and almost everyone is saying Im "dropping pieces" as in losing material for no exchange whatsoever, and thats not the case.

I would still consider it piece dropping if you aren't getting near full compensation or full compensation for it. Sacrificial strategies that are unsound aren't going to work as you climb to higher levels so don't bother with them now. Only sac something if it is tactically justfied and you can calculate through it.

Sac'ing something can be strategically justified too (Ex, Rxc3 in the Sicilian) but you need to really feel the compensation and be confident about it not going away.  Rxc3 isn't always called for and you need to recognize when you should play the move and when its not worth it.

An example of what not to do is like sac a bishop on g6 or h7 just cause it 'looks like' you get an attack. Calculate it and evaluate the resulting positon and be sure that its the correct move. Remember that if you fail to get the attack, your behind a piece and in a losing position.

I use the English opening as white and the King's Indian defense as black agains prety much anything but e4 in which case I use the Caro kann. I like the kid and English because with most other openings my openings may get compromised when the opponent responds out of line. For example when someone responds to my e4 with c6, what I inter to be King's gambit or scotch game turns into Caro kann. However with the English and the KID if something unexpected happens it just falls into a variation. However to get good with these opening would reworked a great deal of study on the variations. For black go with the KID against d4 or c4 especially it's a conservative opening that builds a good defense for your king and afterword use counterplay. For white try the English or london system.

i am the king

---

 Nice Metallica reference

if you intended it atleast

 

but hey I guess he is the the thing that should not be

Lack of opening knowledge is not why better players are crushing you.  

 ego ego ego.

When you play someone much better than you, like 200-300 points, they will often crush you in the opening.  So it's natural to think that with better opening knowledge you'll have a good game.  That's assuming they play book and you know the book.  But they don't have to play the book.  And they will still make better moves.  The difference is not opening knowledge.

Try the Lasker Trap.