Chess Openings for beginner?

Exactly. People who say this have no idea what they're talking about. Improving your opening play and understanding openings is a part of improving at the game.

Well they need to play more games and that's on them. The issue with telling lower rated players not to learn openings is that you are essentially telling them to not bother improving at the game.

Understanding opening play and learning how to punish incorrect opening play can win you games. The opponent could do something wrong and they won't know how to punish it because they were taught by some people that opening moves don't matter. You can just play any random moves and who cares, apparently.

Telling a 700 rated player not to learn openings is great advice if you're talking about someone who doesn't care about improving at the game at all and is fine staying at the same level or worse forever. However, it's horrible advice if the person wants to get better and reach a higher level. Learning good opening play is a part of that.

You basically sum up learning openings as memorising lines without understanding and then say that's bad. Yes, that is bad. That doesn't mean that learning openings is bad. You just have to learn them in the right way.

Learning openings by understanding moves rather than just memorising is good. It can help improve your understanding of the game in general.

Memorizing is an integral part of understanding and learning. They all go together. It's impossible to learn at all if we don't have memory. Memorizing without understanding can work sometimes but it's not as strong as memorizing with understanding. But if we go the other way around, there's no way to understand without memorizing. I understand this is semantics but just trying to make things clear that memorization isn't bad at all. It's a must.

Yes, this is definitely a problem. Memorization is important still because it gives you an idea that the current position has diverged and can see how far it diverged. However that skill probably isn't present yet with typical beginners.

Note: Just one of the benefits that I can think of when I wrote that above

You got a point. There are pros and cons but you definitely have a point. The problem with the other suggestions is they think there is one absolute path. Yours is another path to tbat journey.

I think the ponziani is pretty good although I like the London system more.

@DancingQueen2006

I disagree completely. I play the Najdorf from the perspective of both colours and French from the white side. Understanding the ideas has been plenty to play good games in these openings and score some victories. Memorising is a component, like in any opening, but it's not such a big deal at lower levels as not so many people know the theory on both sides. There actually is nothing wrong with playing the Najdorf or French at lower levels. Many people just associate it with learning in this style that you suggest, by memorising theory, because that's what they are told by people who don't like these openings. At lower levels, you can start playing it and learn as you go, gradually improving on it.

I understand your style and your perspective that you don't really appreciate the advantages of playing these openings. That's your choice. But you are teaching others to play in your style by scaring them. That is, you try to discourage them from learning anything about these openings by suggesting that it isn't beneficial or interesting to learn about these openings. This way the number of people who play and appreciate these openings will be reduced without knowing what they're missing.

The people who tell people not to learn these openings are people, such as yourself, who don't like or play these openings. This type of person would just simply prefer that no-one would play these openings as they have no appreciation for them.

It's a shame.

My opinion isn't a minority one. You're just immersed in an echo chamber so you aren't looking at points of view other than your own.

Obviously I mean e4 and people play the French. You're still playing the opening from the white side and can decide which line you like most against it. The French isn't just an opening that black plays. That's not how chess works. The French is an opening that white plays if they play e4 and black responds with e6. Both players are playing the opening.

Caro is solid but a lot more passive. That is, it's very safe but less ambitious as black is slower in pawn breaks. In French and Sicilian, c5 is played in 1 fell swoop instead of having to play c7-c6-c5. Caro is an ok opening but you shouldn't recommend this to just anyone as it may not fit their style. Sicilian is the best for tactical players.

You completely overexaggerate the Najdorf. It has a lot of variations and deviations (which makes it so interesting and beautiful) but it doesn't take loads of theory to play at lower levels. As long as you can follow good opening principles, you can get a good structure and a good game. As you increase in level then of course theory and greater understanding comes with experience but it's still actually totally ok to play casually.

It's not like others have more knowledge of theory than you so you don't have to get into deep theory if you just understand and follow good principles. Then you try to figure it out from there and get better from experience. If you don't start to learn, then you will never learn.

As said by IM and chess coach Andras Toth. How hard is it to do this?

Pieces out, castle and play chess. Not rocket science.

A lot of the Sicilian haters and main line opening haters absolutely lose their minds about this kind of thing like it's deciphering the hieroglyphs or something. There are concrete, understandable ideas behind the Najdorf and French lines if you put just a tiny bit of effort into it instead of constantly complaining and fearmongering about how "intimidating" it is.

This is totally false. I never told them to play the Najdorf. I told them to try out as many openings as possible to see what fits their style. I said the Najdorf was also good to play.

You didn't do anything to me. I was just criticising your opinion and the style of learning you promote because I disagree with it.🤷🏼

I think Italian is a good choice for beginners

Of course it's black who chooses to play the French but it's also a part of white's game as an e4 player and white can develop their preferred way of playing it as an e4 player. There is no point arguing about this anyway. White plays e4, black can respond several different ways. One of those ways is the French. Now both players are in the French opening.

I don't play the French as black. I play the Najdorf and I enjoy it a lot. Against the French I used to play the Tarrasch but I switched to Nc3 for Winawer Poisoned Pawn/Steinitz. These lines are super fun. I used to play the Tarrasch to avoid the Winawer but I realised there was no point in that. Poisoned Pawn is very sharp and aggressive so I like this more. Tarrasch French is also a good choice for white though.

It is a shame. It's nothing personal towards you. What I think is a shame is that someone is discouraged from learning something before they've even started. You don't know which defence would work well for that person and what fits their style. It can be bad to discourage that when you don't understand that person's style and how they learn.

As a beginner (200-900), you should have 1-2 openings as white, and 2 openings as black (one for 1 e4 and one for 1 d4).

Hello. I’m a beginner. When you say “opening,” how many moves do you mean?

A 2-4 move sequence. You should also learn the basic opening principles, and perhaps a few ideas of your chosen openings.

Jobava london for white, French and kings indian for black

This is ridiculous. The opening is over when you developed all 4 minor pieces and castled to safety. That requires 7 moves minimum.

Learning 4 moves and learning that it is called "Open Sicilian" does exactly nothing.

On the other hand, finding the list of "opening principles" and learning them does quite a lot.