Why are some openings considered "for beginners"?

Is this because some openings are considered too complex for new players, or are they just too easily countered at higher levels of play?

Some of both, as I indicate below...

First understand that there is no "best" opening.

However, there are many good, very playable openings, albeit with lots of subjective and inconclusive debate over which are better than others.  In choosing an opening the two issues of most concern tend to be not only its objective effectiveness (irrespective of the player's experience or skill level), but also (particularly for lower rated players) how easy or difficult the opening is to learn and play.  These are the essential points addressed by GM Hikaru Nakamura’s “Chess Openings Tier Lists” series of videos…

Chess Openings Tier Lists – GMHikaru (complete, beginner thru GM)…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9CwH47r6og&list=PL4KCWZ5Ti2H43-gcoByRnZs5fVR_Lg133&index=4

In the tier lists, chess openings are classified in terms of their appropriateness vis-a-vis player skill level -  i.e., beginner vs intermediate vs GM, etc.  For a given player level, the openings are rated and categorized into six "tiers", from "legendary" to "garbage" (the latter being an unfortunate choice of terms, IMO).  These qualifiers are used in the context of not only how much so-called "theory" (documented variations) the particular opening encompasses, but also how "tactical" versus "positional" in character it tends to be, which is generally dictated by how "open" versus "closed" the center is at the conclusion of the opening.  Openings with less theory to learn and which are primarily tactical in character are generally recommended as an appropriate starting point for less experienced players.  So an opening they refer to as "garbage" ("less appropriate" would be a better term) for a beginner may in fact be more appropriate for higher rated players who are assumed to possess a more highly developed requisite knowledge base and skills set. For each of the openings discussed note also whether the evaluation is from White's or Black’s perspective.

For beginner-intermediate players check out ‘GothamChess’ (IM Levy Rozman) on YouTube for recommendations and quick exposure to a variety of openings...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFod-ozimmM&t=103s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qdyik5UwBtM
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=gothamchess+openings
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rmbU97iftC8&list=PLBRObSmbZluTpMdP-rUL3bQ5GA8v4dMbT

Chess opening – Wikipedia…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_opening

Chessable’s Guide to Chess Openings (for White & Black)...
https://www.chessable.com/blog/opening-guide/

Openings Guides – SimplifyChess.com...
https://simplifychess.com/homepage/openings.html

‘Hanging Pawns’ openings videos on YouTube…
https://www.youtube.com/c/HangingPawns

For more on openings fundamentals and principles, as well as specific openings, see...

Chess Openings Resources for Beginners and Beyond...
https://www.chess.com/blog/RussBell/openings-resources-for-beginners-and-beyond

more helpful chess resources, including openings and book recommendations, in my blog...
https://www.chess.com/blog/RussBell

They are deemed so because a beginner cannot really understand the tactics involved in, say, an opening like the Sicilian; whereas, an opening like the Italian seems intuitive to a beginner where you develop your knights early and have a central pawn and most of them castle early.

However, at higher levels of play, the tactics and nuances of every move is very tricky comparatively, which a beginner will not really understand.

👌

I typically recommend simple openings to beginners, eg. after 1.e4, if your opponent replies with the French (1...e6) or Caro (1...c6), I suggest playing the exchange variation of both (3... exd5), then develop your pieces and castle. These openings do not require an awful lot of memorisation at lower levels, and it's more about "playing chess" from a position that lacks complexity. This allows you to focus your learning/development time on the areas of chess that matter, eg. tactics and improving general board vision.

These exchange lines are often seen as drawish and unambitious at the higher levels, although are perfectly playable at all levels, bar the very top, who will probably only play into these lines if they want a draw.

On the other hand, some openings can lead to closed and complex positional games that again are best avoided by beginners, because they may lack the general fundamentals to prosper in such positions.

The openings recommended for beginners are the same as those for world championship candidates. 1 e4 e5, 1 d4 d5. They lead to natural play for development and the center.

Beginners are expected to improve. Therefore, they are not necessarily recommended the openings that will give the best results in the short run, but instead the openings that will develop their playing strength.

Chess has historically moved through several periods as knowledge was accumulated by new generation and the game became more and more advanced. New players are often advised to follow an evolution similar to this history. That is, they should initially play as people did before 1900 (seek inspiration, for example, from Morphy and Adolf Anderssen): 1.e4 e5 etc. with open positions where there are plenty of tactical possibilities to develop one's game.

An opening like the Italian is very symmetrical and simple to understand. You develop your pieces in a very principled way and have very healthy activity so it's easier to understand what each side is playing for.

Compare this to a very theory heavy, positional opening like the Caro-Kann. A lot of beginners try to play this opening but often don't really understand what they're playing for. You have to understand both e5 and c5 breaks and when they are good and when they aren't. You do activate the light squared bishop but it doesn't really do much in terms of aggression as it's normally just to trade it off so it's a much more positional concept. Consider this theoretical line:

You can see how the play is much less intuitive as black is moving the same piece several times in the opening only to trade it off. It can be much harder for a lower level player to understand what they're playing for compared to the Italian or the Sicilian.

Go rus

True, system openings like the London can actually be bad for the development of beginners as it's not teaching you to contest the centre or adapt to and challenge your opponent's setup.

The reason some players recommend this, is because it's very safe. You can develop bad habits though as you are often playing the same moves on auto-pilot and it's a passive mindset.

I wouldn't recommend anyone play like this.

Openings per se shouldn't be studied at all by beginners but instead "Opening Principles" should be applied and these, if understood and applied should be good enough to get one out of the Opening, as all Openings are based off these principles any way.  I'd advise against memorizing long lines of Opening theory etc. as it won't profit you much during the game.  Things like developing your pieces, castling, not getting your Queen out early, will take your far though, at least at the early stages of your Chess career. 

I strongly disagree with the above point. As a beginner I believe that one of the most beneficial things I have done is to learn some basic openings. It has improved both my skill and confidence as well as helped me improve my rating. I spent a long time playing random developing moves and I never felt confident in the positions I ended up in.

Beginners like myself are constantly told “Don’t play any openings because it will not help you improve as well as waste your study time.” I don’t know why this is the case but in my (very limited) experience I have found this to be untrue. Others may have different experiences than I did, but for me a few moves into some openings tremendously improved my game.

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/for-beginners/no-openings-for-beginners

No, it doesn't. Even at the highest levels the Italian opening is way more popular than the London or Kings Indian.

But it means that a beginner probably could get better scores on the short run by learning some closed system setups like Colle or London (which are not great openings). But the beginner who starts by playing open games may struggle a while, but in the longer run will improve to at least 1500-1700 (chess.com rating) while the system player will probably be stuck at 1200 at the best.

Then, when you reach your first (or second .. or) limit and don't have any high ambitions of improving, it will be usefull to adopt some openings that suits your style.

The reasoning is simple, by studying "Openings" you're studying long lines that your opponent may or may not play, and the lower the rating the higher the chances of them not playing it, so a beginner is not going to play some super complicated variation of the King's Indian that maybe you spent all night studying, hoping for an advantage of a centipawn as White.  

Your time is better spent learning basic Chess tactics, such as forks, pins and skewers etc., so when your opponent blunders, you're ready to take advantage of that. 

i agree partially with the above comment. Learning tactics is way better for beginners because on the not-so-long run it really pays off well and helps you evolve into knowing when to do what, wich means also knowing how to work with the pieces in the openings, even without really knowing too much about em. But i also think that learning simple openings when being a beginner is good since usually studying it also means studying the effects and causes of doing certain moves, adding some knowledge into openings and also into not doing THRASH moves

Hi

Hi! Typical recommended openings for beginners are 1.e4 as White, and then 1.e4, e5 or 1.d4, d5 as Black. These are classical openings that basically consistson occupying the centre with pawns (White) and holding a stake of the centre with pawns (Black) just from the start. So opening strategy is more easy to understand and follow compared to more sofisticated openings like the semi-open ones or the hypermodern type.

Good luck!

I like others would recommend Levy Rozman's advice from his videos as he has in the past been a teacher of young and new players. One idea he said was great to teach new people was The Vienna Defense and I think you'll find a lot of potential in that opening.

I would not recommend Levy Rozman's advice at all as he is mostly just policing people's openings based on his own style. His style is that he tells people to play offbeat lines which are generally bad. He is a decent chess entertainer but his advice as a chess coach is dubious.

A lot of his content is just making fun of lower level players for playing badly.

This is actually not at all a bad refutation of my idea. I still find The Vienna to be a solid defense but he does have some strange ideas like he literally recommended newer players to try The Scandinavian.