Tamburro's Opening for Amateurs - too advanced for me?

I've seen several recommendations for Tamburro's Openings for Amateurs and it looked quite good based on reviews and a sample that I read on Amazon.  So I've bought it and started to work through the Primer (aka "Mistakes Most Often Made by Amateurs in Openings").  The Intro says the book is aimed at people ranked between 1100 and 1900, and since my Rapid rating here is just over 1100, I thought it would be appropriate.  However, I'm now wondering whether it is too advanced for me and I need something that lies between a basic book for beginners and a book of this level.

To give more info, the second mistake covered in the Primer is "Allowing Early Simplification".  In the second paragraph of that section is a sample game which I think is basically illustrating the consequences of White permitting Black to exchange dark-squared bishops early.  The first 11 moves (6 for White, 5 for Black) make reasonable sense - the author points out quite clearly how White has permitted the issue to arise.  Then the author explains the consequence by presenting a further sequence of 6 moves.  What baffles me is why these are the likely next moves played in the game.  There is no explanation of why these are the ones followed.  I can see the point that *if* these moves are followed then Black is in a better position than they might have been, but I don't see why White couldn't have played better moves (if such exist?) to stop this.

This isn't the only example in the first half-dozen pages that I've read.  At the level I'm at, I would like to see more explanation as to why particular moves are being selected.  My question therefore is whether Tamburro's book is just too advanced for my level and whether I need to read some other source(s) before embarking on this.

Thank you in advance for your consideration of my question!  I hope it makes sense.  (Apologies if it is too long for a forum post here!)

@1
++ Who is Tamburro? Never heard of. Does not figure in the FIDE rating list.
"I would like to see more explanation as to why particular moves are being selected."
++ Openings are difficult and even the best of the best are not sure.
Openings are subject to fashion.
Particular moves are being selected because somebody had some success with it previously.
"whether Tamburro's book is just too advanced" ++ It seems not useful at all.
"whether I need to read some other source(s)" ++ Study an endgame book

'In order to improve your game you must study the endgame before everything else;
for, whereas the endings can be studied and mastered by themselves,
the middlegame and the opening must be studied in relation to the endgame.' - Capablanca

I quickly went through the sample, didn't like it at all. Convoluted examples in not so easy openings like the Scandinavian, the Dutch or trashy sicilian lines, and too many times the annotations are simply unconvincing (the next position, lines and annotations, are just unbelievable). They are much better, at any rate simpler, examples of how trading a pair of minors eases Black's game than this Dutch line, which is still assessed as much better for White by engines anyway, and same goes for more than half the positions given.

Thanks both for your thoughts.

In answer to @tygxc, the reason I thought to work on my openings is that I judge myself to be better at endgame than at openings / early middlegame.  I find myself getting five or six moves into a game and just not having a clue what to play next, while if someone plays something other than e5 at me then I flounder pretty quickly.  I've heard of Sicilian, I think it's got something to do with the bishop's pawn, but that's it.  (Short version: I know nothing about the Sicilian!)  On the other hand, mostly if I get to the endgame on parity then I think I've got a good chance against people of a similar rating.  Yes, I've messed up a few times when I was in a winning position and blundered away a back rank mate against me, but I'm learning to keep my eyes open for that.

@Newal: Thanks for your thoughts.  Perhaps it isn't just me then and maybe this was a poor purchase for me.

To rephrase my original question then - what would be a good way to improve for a 1100 rated player who knows no openings (just the basic principle of getting a pawn or two in the centre, activating knights and bishops, and castling moderately early), finds themself often unsure what to do after about 5 - 8 moves into the game, and feels moderately competent about (ok, reasonably basic) endgame play.

At the moment, I'm mostly playing games to practice (plus puzzles), but every few games get that sinking feeling that my opponent is way more clued up about what to do in the opening / early middle game.

No, the book is not a primary source....obviously. Im not getting into a trash and bash because for 1 this guy is a member and that is t.o.s.

He states it as such in the intro, so I dont know why you would expect anything more. It is a compilation of columns.

I dont know why this is so hard. If you want to learn ANY subject, you go about it in an educational way. Or you can learn the shortcut tricks how to win in 4 moves...ask Google in 1 second.

Thanks for the comments.  I now conclude that I've made a mistake.

@nighteyes1234: You make in theory a good point.  If I want to learn a subject, what I would do is get a good book on the subject.  The choice of this book had come out of using Google to find a recommendation of a good book on the topic and I had believed the positive description that I had found via that method.  Evidently, this was a flawed search.

When I search for "chess books for 1100 rating", I hit a forum thread on this site which then links to the following page: http://beginchess.com/2009/07/03/recommended-chess-book-reading-list-by-rating-updated/
I guess then the five books listed for 1200-1400 players?

I don't know if any of these cover openings?  None on the page seems to expicitly list openings as what they are about.  Does it matter if I don't know what Sicilian or any other opening actually is at this low rating?

@7
"Does it matter if I don't know what Sicilian or any other opening actually is at this low rating?"
++ No, that does not matter at all. Do not worry about openings. Just play thoughtfully, and whenever you lose, analyse your game so as to learn from your mistakes.

Educationally....a beginner guide to openings should be:

*division of chess skills(strategy,tactics,positional)..with strategy being #1 in the opening

*A simpler opening set to get to the middle game...the building blocks approach.

You probably will hate it...for example it will say french exchange, and then causing trouble for white and defending for black. And then advanced..and then etc.

Educational books are dry. They dont attempt to entertain. Also, they contain "chess"...ie chess terms.

I would say go semi-educational. like Zurich International Chess Tournament, 1953. I just remembering mostly skimming it, and thinking wow these guys are good. Pawn structures. And then going back and going back. Books that stew work for openings.

Openings are not going to be a major issue, but if you insist on looking for an opening repertoire, Seleicki's "Keep It Simple 1. e4" and "Keep It Simple 1. d4" would be the place to start.

Pete Tamburro's book "Openings for Amateurs" is ok as an openings repertoire reference for experienced players, but not a particularly good book for lower-rated chess amateurs, especially those at beginner-novice level, to learn from.  (I own the book.)  As the OP has discerned, the book does a very poor job of explaining why any moves are being made.  In fact, there is very little mention, anywhere, of why moves are made.   Here are some books which do a better job in this regard...

Good Chess Openings Books For Beginners and Beyond...

https://www.chess.com/blog/RussBell/good-chess-openings-books-for-beginners-and-beyond

I would say it is not even a good book for experienced players.  There are simply so many sources that are just far better.

I cannot disagree.  Yes, there are too many better books on openings (including those by Christof Sielecki).

HI! I own several opening books and I agree that FCO: Fundamental Chess Openings

By Paul van der Sterren.  is possibly the best single-volume openings reference. 

Good luck!

continued....

FCO is suitable for beginners/intermediates because it has a lot of explanations and doesn't go very deep - hardly goes further than 10 -12 moves

Thanks very much to everyone for your replies.

My short conclusion: The book under discussion is not suitable for me at my current levels.  I shall seek other alternative ways to improve (using some of the resources suggested above to guide me).

Once again, thank you for all the input.

Tamburro writes for American Chess Magazine.

Where I think the OP is getting confused is he thinks it is an opening repertoire book.  IT IS NOT!!  That is why you do not see explanations at each move.

The game he references is showing what White SHOULD NOT DO!  He is showing WHY early trading us often a bad thing, especially for White.  White goes first.  White often gets a space advantage.  The one that wants to trade pieces is the one that lacks space.

If you have 16 felons in a single jail cell, and I have 16 felons locked up in a 50 foot by 50 foot room, sure both are locked up, but which has more room for people to maneuver?  Which would love to get rid of a few inmates?

The 50 by 50 room is White, the jail cell is Black.

Do not start to think it is a repertoire book.  It is a book on opening concepts.  Very appropriate for 1100.  He is just looking at it wrong, and is trying to get a repertoire out of it rather than trying to understand it conceptually at face value.  Early and quick trades are often bad, especially for White.  They are talking piece trades, not the trade of a pawn or two.

An opening book that I think would be useful for lower-rated players is "Winning Chess Openings" by Yasser Seirawan. In fact, I think it can be read twice. The book explains the principles that underlie the openings very well. Later, you can red it to learn move about specific openings