Openings for 'experienced' beginners developing their game further

@sred It almost all I watch he is very good and that is where I got the recommendations for these openings to start with. Watching lots of games with these openings to see what he does.

I would drop the London. Here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qy-JX7hoy-g

If you really want to learn how to play chess I would start with 1.e4 and some gambits... (Danish, King's, Evans, etc.)

If they choose the Vienna a la Gotham, they get the Vienna gambit, too.

I wouldn't recommend studying the opening in the way you are describing. There are 2 problems with this in my view: the way you describe how you'd learn the opening (learning moves as far as you can), but more importantly the idea that you should be spending so much time on the opening at your level. 

I've written about this in greater length before (search the beginners' forums and you find more elaborate posts), but the gist of it comes down to this. Chess openings can be played on the basis of sound opening principles. These are: controlling the center (white wants the e4/d4 center, black wants to prevent this (or destroy it immediately by challenging it and making white move one of his pawns if white does get it), developing your pieces (as fast as you can, so move them only once) and getting your king safe. Almost all opening moves in almost all major openings can be explained with the use of these principles. Grandmasters don't do weird things in the beginning phase of the opening. 

Real theory starts at a later point during the opening. That's when GMs come up with new ideas. The hard part at your level is that you're unlikely to fully grasp the extent of the idea. That's because your middlegame understanding is not yet at the necessary level. Say a certain move is played with the idea of playing with the space advantage. You might know the move, but 3 moves later when you're out of your theory, you might trade a few pieces. However, trading pieces is usually the right strategy for the opponent who has the cramped position. So because you didn't fully understand the middlegame strategy, you've turned the GM's idea into a weapon against yourself. At this point it would've been much better if you had played an idea of your own that maybe isn't anything special according to theory, but that you are familiar with and can see what your goals could be. 

So what I'm getting at is that playing the opening should be based on ideas. You don't castle because the line says you need to castle at move 5. You castle because it's important to get your king safe. Playing with ideas leads to more creative freedom, which is important when you're responding to moves that you've never seen before. This way you can adapt. Is your opponent answering 1. d4 with 1. ...f6? Then it's just bad chess in my view if you continue with 2. Bf4 or 2. c3. If your opponent makes such a big mistake, you need to be able to punish it. And knowing 1. ...f6 isn't doing anything to combat the center, would lead you to knowing that 2. e4 must be the right way going forward. 

One more problem I have with studying the opening is that it's inefficient for players up to, say, 2000 (or higher, really). The goal of opening theory is to gain a small advantage for white or to equalize for black. Look at your own games: how many times has a small advantage carried you all the way to victory? Never, right? It doesn't even happen all that much in my games that the other side never really gets the chance to equalize. Mistakes are made and in lower rated games these mistakes are often larger than the small advantage you could gain in the opening. So it's more important and it'll get you more results if you'd know more about the middelgame and would be better at tactics. In lower rated games it doesn't really matter if you're equal or even a little bit worse in a certain position. If you outplay your opponent in the middlegame, you'll win almost any game. Another bonus is, of course, that if you are well aware of proper middlegame strategies that studying and understanding the opening will become easier. Knowing that in closed positions you play for pawn breaks, you know that in the French advanced variation with the d4-e5 vs d5-e6 pawn center, black will be looking to play ...c5 and/or ...f6 at an early stage of the opening. There's no opening theory needed for this, it directly follows from understanding the middlegame. 

I hope that by writing this you see how important ideas are versus learning moves. That's why, if you really must study the opening, make sure you look at games. See what the strong player is doing. Especially look for games between stronger players and weaker ones, because that way certain ideas will become clear sooner. Picking up an opening book or watching youtube to learn ideas in an opening can be useful too, but always be aware that there are always going to be parts that aren't going to be explained. Either moves that are obvious to the writer / maker of the video or other possible reactions from the other player. Sooner or later you will be on your own and at that point it's more important that you understand the position and feel at ease in the position than the objective evaluation.

I would like to state once again, openings don't matter at all for beginners or intermediate players. I find this detailed discussion hilarious considering the biggest focus for us should be to stop blundering and not to build an opening repertoire 

I would like to state once again, openings don't matter at all for beginners or intermediate players. I find this detailed discussion hilarious considering the biggest focus for us should be to stop blundering and not to build an opening repertoire 

Usual anti-London shade going on. 'Do not ply London, it will make you hate chess, ffs...' Nonsense. Play d4. It's the most logical first move, Captain. Queen's gambit is an option (but nobody ever plays into the traps, so you'll bore yourself stiff forever in the declined lines.) Check out Barry Attack, Mason Attack, Blackmar-Diemer, and Richter-Veresov. As black I play Caro Kann, and I'm currently shopping around for something better, as the transpositions are just annoying. 

I haven't played chess competitively for about 6 years since 2016, but I was trying to point out that if you haven't prepared the openings by rote the higher rated players will usually caught you by traps.