Non-book players

Maybe you guys could help me. I am not sure how to play against players who have no experience in book moves. Should i just develop pieces while he just pawn pushes and makes wierd opening moves or something else? Here's an example of the first couple moves i had with him. I was black and he always plays this wierd opening maybe you guys could help me exploit it.

And here is the variation he uses when he's on black...

Just do the normal moves, fianchetto is ok, develop your pieces and if he moves his queens nose too far away you snatch her from him.

Don't worry too much about out of book moves (especially if the out of book move is something that doesn't look right).  Just continue on with simple development and you should be fine.  He is using tempo early by moving his Queen (really early like that it really isn't a good idea - because you usually don't really know where you want your Queen and your Lady isn't supposed to be heading the attack).  There is nothing wrong with trying to bring it to his Queenside since it is really weak with the Queen out of place.

"Punish the weak moves." --->Thank you captain obvious.  

Don't punish the weak moves. Instead make healthy moves and your opponent will soon find himself in an unpleasant situation when his developing moves have run out early

In both openings I'd just develop my queen night to c3/c6 to get get ready to hop into d5/d4.  It's unpleasent for the guy with the early queen move and a sound developing move, prepares central domination and let's you kick the queen around...

"If your opponent makes some strange move or moves which will give him a good gamie if you continue to play in standard fashion, it is usually necessary to react yourself with some exceptional solution."

Alexander Alekhine

With 1 e4,e5.  2 Nf3, Qf6.  After you move your d pawn the move Bg5 is a threat.

I think that the top part is terrible advice, in Reassess Your Chess Jeremy Silman says that you develop with a purpose don't just randomly develop pieces if you have no plan. 

Don't get too caught up in the trap of thinking you have to 'punish the bad moves' after the 2nd move, in all likelyhood the refutation is not going to be an instantaneous one move bombshell.  Just play solidly, get developed quickly (if you can develop with tempo on that early queen, great).  Once you are developed, its time to open the center and get there the firstest with the mostest.

This is good advice. His early queen move is not a tactical error with a tactical refutation, it is a positional error. Don't make him pay now, make him pay 10 moves later.

This is the way I'd approach it.  When your opponent makes a bizarre move that neither helps him or hurts you, he's basically just giving you a free turn.  Use it to continue good, solid development.

There's lots of good general advice in this thread, but this nugget is a very strong answer for the specific problem of an early queen on f3/f6.   From d4, the knight hits the queen on f3 and (usually) threatens a fork on c2.  The queen is responsible for guarding c2 this early in the game, so this threat often forces White to retreat the queen right back to d1.  You get a really nice development lead with this approach.  Sometimes Nb4 can also be awkward for White to meet when the queen is away, though this very much depends on the specific position because you're not hitting the queen with this move.  It really comes down to what his options are for guarding c2.  Same ideas work with White (Nc3-d5/b5), and the extra tempo makes the development lead you gain even more deadly.

two ideas:

1) play a better class of opponent by using the presets.  I think it is better for our overall development to play opponents that are either close to our level or better. Playing someone that doesn't know anything is probably not all that helpful.

2) Develop as normal, don't go way off your game plan unless you know you will also be able to follow through your development, or you could find yourself playing down to your opponent, and on their turf. You will end up in the chess version of a bar fight.

Study strategy.

Playing someone that doesn't follow the book does not mean that opponent does not know anything. Some players like to play outside the book as a challenge.  

 The second recommendation is really good advice, I think, because playing just by the book leaves one unable to play well against weird or unfamiliar book moves or something the opponent has developed. Unless one is a GM, it is impossible to memorize all of the opening plus their variations. One is bound to play others that know weird moves, so without a sound knowledge of rules of thumb, or principles, it is easy to find oneself playing the opponent's game. Or totally lost as to what to do. 

“Every chess player should have his own opening secrets.” from Rules of Thumb.

Who is to say that what might appear to be non-book is really a secret opening in disgust?  

Corsspiner,

I would surmise the reasons for a non-standard opening would include:

1)      Lack of knowledge: someone that will lack development and understandings of positions as well as strategy.

2)      Trying to ‘bait’ you: the person has some basic knowledge and is perhaps strong in the mid-game, they are trying to get you to jump the gun, thus negating the advantage you poses with the sound tactical position of a good opening.

3)      I guess they could also do it simple “for the heck of it”.

None of those sound like a real solid player. Either by ignorance, or some sort of twisted reason, you opponent has given you the advantage of hundreds of years worth of development of opening theory.  I would use that to your advantage.

4)  Or they could be very solid players like Joel Benjamin, Michael Baseman, or Duncan Suttles fixing to set you some positional problems to solve..  Never underestimate your opponent or his opening, as Karpov found out when he played Tony Miles.

In the words of H. K. Pollock: "It is no easy matter to reply correctly to Lasker's bad moves."

You are correct in all of those, but I don’t believe this post is about a solid player to begin with, in fact, the poster only asked for a solution to deal with that one particular opening.  The opponent may have variations to it, and giving advice dealing with that particular opening would not do much good if a player has no sound knowledge of principles or rules of thumb to deal with any variations the opponent may execute.  It seems that players want a quick fix, so to speak, when usually such fixes solve nothing in the long run.