I don't know how to get better.

I definently agree with GMatchen, as the openings are not something a beginner should learn at all. If they learn an opening it should be something that is simplified or easy to understand. If they dive down too deep they will get confused and will not know what to do. Also at that level, understanding openings is pointless if you don't understand the name of the game, and that is to get good positionally, tactically and endgames.

I would say tactics matter from 2000 and down, however 2000 and up it is up to the positional part of the game as people make lesser and from there it is up to the better positional player to outplay there opponent. The game of Chess is a positional game as it is built on posiitons, truly if you don't have any positional knowledge and skill you will not succeed in the game, it is that simple. I don't care how good you are tactically, yes tactics is fun and its is cool to watch, however the positional aspect shows one true skill. The only thing I will say is that it is cool to see what computers can do in this day and age with calculation, however no human is even close to that, so truly positional knowledge outclasses this and more importantly outclasses and outranks any opening knowledge. 

I would say openings is about 10% of the game, if that. The positional, tactical, and endgame covers the rest, however that is from a broad view. But as for openings being relievant for a 1600-1800 or below, I say no, it is no point, as it takes to much time, most people don't memorize or care for too many openings on that level, sure they may have there own small repitoire but nothing more outside of that.

So what I am saying is have your small repirtoire, but don't get into it too much and focus on the positional, tactical, endgame, strategical, and principled part of the game. Then once hit at least 1800(though I recommend 2000) then you can dig down deep into a lot of openings as in those levels you will need it. 

I definently agree with GMatchen, as the openings are not something a beginner should learn at all. If they learn an opening it should be something that is simplified or easy to understand. If they dive down too deep they will get confused and will not know what to do. Also at that level, understanding openings is pointless if you don't understand the name of the game, and that is to get good positionally, tactically and endgames.

I would say tactics matter from 2000 and down, however 2000 and up it is up to the positional part of the game as people make lesser and from there it is up to the better positional player to outplay there opponent. The game of Chess is a positional game as it is built on posiitons, truly if you don't have any positional knowledge and skill you will not succeed in the game, it is that simple. I don't care how good you are tactically, yes tactics is fun and its is cool to watch, however the positional aspect shows one true skill. The only thing I will say is that it is cool to see what computers can do in this day and age with calculation, however no human is even close to that, so truly positional knowledge outclasses this and more importantly outclasses and outranks any opening knowledge. 

I would say openings is about 10% of the game, if that. The positional, tactical, and endgame covers the rest, however that is from a broad view. But as for openings being relievant for a 1600-1800 or below, I say no, it is no point, as it takes to much time, most people don't memorize or care for too many openings on that level, sure they may have there own small repitoire but nothing more outside of that.

So what I am saying is have your small repirtoire, but don't get into it too much and focus on the positional, tactical, endgame, strategical, and principled part of the game. Then once hit at least 1800(though I recommend 2000) then you can dig down deep into a lot of openings as in those levels you will need it. 

I would not include "Understand Openings" as advice to an 800 player. Even masters don't fully "understand openings", and it takes WAY too much time to learn all the variations, pawn structures and why they work. But yes, know opening Principles-that is very important. You don't need to understand most openings if you just understand opening principles--at least until you get to 2000 level.

@Marie-Annie Liz, you don't know how to play Chess then, simple as that. You are not playing Chess, you are playing some other game, don't you hear yourself. I mean come on man.

Let me tell you something: Have you seen any good master, or Grandmaster, that is not exceptional good at least with either: Positional game, Tactics, or Endgames or the principles no probably not because you never played one. Moreover I didn't say that the opening wasn't worth understanding, it is just not worth understanding for his level. 

What good is it,to be exceptional at the opening, but terrible at the principled,Endgame, Positional, and Tactical part of the game? This is why I said you must be playing some other game than Chess, because if the only thing you rely on is the openings to win your games, you can't be a good chess player, I don't care what you rating says. Sure there is such thing as opening preperation, but not using the opening to win the game, that is called a trap. 

Sure you may be some type of trap expert, however that is not playing Chess. Because you should know that Chess is a game of positions and building positions and a game of outplaying, not necessarily always meaning outstudying, or in this case studying the opening, especially for a player that is only 1000. 

See @Marie-Annie Liz you are one of those people on the Forums that gets up and don't know what they are talking about. Did you really think I said that you don't need the opening principles or some of the understanding of the opening. I said you need the principled part of the game, you thought I said that for no reason huh. Yo you need to fact check yourself, before you come at me.

Because I when I make claims it is not for accident. 

According to who @Marie-AnnelLiz according to you? How do you know that everyone has the same capability for understanding and learning, I know you don't know so what is the point of saying this. 

If you are going on estimations that is one thing, but how can you prove this, just tell me because I don't understand how you can generalize someone's learning ability.

No man I am not getting personal, I am just saying the truth, you think I am getting mad about an argument I am winning? Besides, like I said the principled part already covers openings. What you are talking about is going into depth with these openings, and it is just not neccessary. It is better for someone to have 5-10 elite openings than to have 20-30 openings they are average, with and funny thing is, many people do that. Perhaps you just don't, it is a good tip even for you, if you are just willing to accept it.