Lets be scientific about it. Lets propose a hypothesis. Lets take a sample of games at intermediate level, say 100.
How many games do players lose statistically as a direct consequence of a serious mistake from the opening?? How many do they lose statistically in the middle game? How many do they lose in the endgame?
Perhaps that will answer how important openings are in comparison to other areas?
It could be useful but probably not conclusive.
For example if a game is lost after 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Ne4 3.d3 Nc5 4.d4 Ne4 5.f3 can we really blame a lack of opening knowledge for this loss?
Tactics are important variables and since they can crop up at any time they can skew results. That's also why people talk about their importance so much.
If it was the only game in a sample of 100 then we can say with some certainty that losses directly resulting from the opening was 1 percent. This would indicate either that intermediate players are all booked up and consitently play sound lines right into the middle game or that openings are not that important to the result of the game.
OK I guess technically it is a loss in the opening but I don't think the reasons for losses in the opening are always a lack of opening knowledge. This is why I think such an approach can be iffy. A player doesn't strand a knight in the middle of the board because extremely complicated theory was required to prevent that but because they simply didn't calculate.
On the other hand there are some really sharp openings that are very difficult to calculate and can be problematic without opening knowledge.
An opening report may not be able to discern these two situations and you could get the wrong coclusions.
The best comment I have ever heard on this issue came from NM Reb. In fact I liked it so much I saved it.
NM Reb
Chess has 3 phases : Opening , Middlegame , and Ending . If you lose in the opening it wont matter how good you are in the other 2 phases so anyone who says you don't need to study openings can safely be ignored . Every game of chess has an opening phase but the same claim cannot be made for the other 2 phases .... Examine your lost games ... did you lose any of them in the opening phase ? If many , or most , of your losses were due to poor opening play then you need to study your openings ... its that simple.
Nothing can be said more straight forward than that. Chess is 3 phases Fact! If you are not studying all 3 phases your not trying to improve your chess.
OK I guess technically it is a loss in the opening but I don't think the reasons for losses in the opening are always a lack of opening knowledge. This is why I think such an approach can be iffy. A player doesn't strand a knight in the middle of the board because extremely complicated theory was required to prevent that but because they simply didn't calculate.
On the other hand there are some really sharp openings that are very difficult to calculate and can be problematic without opening knowledge.
An opening report may not be able to discern these two situations and you could get the wrong coclusions.
yes but the same can be said of any other phase of a chess game as well and we are not so concerned with looking at the opening in isolation but in making a comparison with other phases of the chess game. What this appears to me to mean is that there should be a cancelling out of errors due to tactics because tactics can occur at any given point, positions can become sharp in any of the other phases as well. My own exerience is that the end game is probaly the sharpest of all because often its decided by a single tempo in gaining the opposition, pawn promotion, zugswan etc etc
Lets be scientific about it. Lets propose a hypothesis. Lets take a sample of games at intermediate level, say 100.
How many games do players lose statistically as a direct consequence of a serious mistake from the opening?? How many do they lose statistically in the middle game? How many do they lose in the endgame?
Perhaps that will answer how important openings are in comparison to other areas?
This is a good idea, but I believe you have to do this with your own games for it to be fully effective as everyone is likely to be at different stages of development (though tactics will probably come out on top most of the time).
This is exactly what I do with my own rated OTB games regularly. I take each game and look for the main positives and main areas for improvement for each one, win, lose or draw. I tally them up and this helps me focus on what I need to be studying. I started this after about 20 OTB games reflectively, then I add to the list with each game I play, now 35 OTB games. (My OTB grade is currently equivalent to 1600 FIDE, though I have been close to 1700 at one stage.)
Here's a short summary of what I found, now based on 35 games:
Attacking tactics: 23%
Defensive tactics: 20%
Openings: 20%
Psychological factors: 20%
Endgame: 10%
Positional: 7%
For "attacking tactics" to have been included, this refers to a tactical oversight on my behalf. I missed a chance to win material. "Defensive tactics" I overlooked my opponent's tactics. "Openings" I was either lost out of the opening (2 out of 35 games) or the opening caused by significant trouble and was judged to be the main reason I lost/drew the game. "Psychological" I lost my composure significantly enough that this was the main reason behind me losing/drawing or I did not mentally warm up for the game or other external factors. "Endgame" I lost from a winning/drawing endgame. "Positional" I lost/drew due to poor positional knowledge (like playing closed games incorrectly.) Yes this is just a rule of thumb, a snapshot of each game, so it's not 100% accurate or in any way scientific, but it aims to give me a general indication of what I need to work on.
Points to consider:
* Tactics. My priority area for improvement remains tactics, both attacking and defensive. I was surprised by how many attacking opportunities I had overlooked.
* Openings. Featured more significantly than I first might have thought. I have had to do a lot of work in this area because it is something that I have neglected in the past ("forget the openings, just study tactics.") I also found that getting into a familiar opening settled me into the game. I tried to plug the main gaps, with a month of doing virtually nothing but studying my openings.
* Psychological factors. Not something people talk a lot about, but developing a calm, and disciplined approach, managing distractions, maintaining a positive and fighting spirit is worth a hell of a lot more than people give it credit for. Consciously tried to work on this and think I have improved significantly, well not had a mental breakdown for a while and remain calm during my games, mostly.
* Endgames. Misplayed at least three endgames, but one of those I put down as psychological as I lost my head. Spent several weeks recapping endgame material.
So conclusion regarding opening study is that yes it is important - certainly much more than 1% significant and it is to be included along with all parts of the game. My weight of study should be directed towards tactics though still as a priority, but I can't afford to overlook other areas of the game either.
To the OP
I personally do not agree that playing with out the Queens is the best way to improve your chess. I believe the Queen can be a very effective unit.
However, Having said all of that I do realize often when people tell other people not to do something they usually don't listen and simply do the opposite. Or even worse they get more stubborn in their ways and continue playing the same way they always have played just to prove others wrong.
I once had a elderly man tell me a story of a lesson he learned in 1920-30. This story the elderly man told me happen many years ago at the time the elderly man was in his 80's. He told me a story about how his grandfather gave him a lesson in which he never forgot.
When the Elderly man was younger(a kid) he stayed with his Grandfather. His parents had died and he was a kid and the only person to look after him was his Grandfather.
One day he stole one of his Grandfathers cigars. His Grandfather liked to smoke. Well him being a kid he thought he would take one and smoke it with out his grandfather knowing.The Elderly man told me that at the time. he thought it seemed cool and alot of his grandfathers friends smoked so he thought it was cool and almost adult-ish.
Well his grandfather found out and his grandfather punished him. However, he punished him in a very unusual way. Back than their was no child abuse or any of that jazz. His grandfather bought a carton of cigars.
Not some small pack some huge pack of cigars. His grandfather said you want to smoke cigars? Well their you go. He locked him in his room and told him he could not come out until he finished every single one of those cigars. The Elderly man told me the 1st day he was happy that he got cigars like he wanted. He said after the 2nd day he hated cigars more than anything in life. He than said it took him over 3 days to finish all of those cigars. He said after he finished those cigars he never smoked again in his life. The mere sight of a cigar sickened him. He told me. He was 84 years old and the lesson his grandfather gave him happen when he was 14 over 70 years later he never touched a cigar, cigarette, or even liked the smell of smoke. He hated cigars and the smell of smoke. He said it was a lesson he learned the hard way that changed him for the better.
Now why am I telling you all of this? Well the Elderly man wanted a cigar. You wanted queenless positions. I am going to give you exactly what you want. You will have so many queenless positions. The mere sight of a queenless position will sicken you. An maybe just maybe your game will change for the better. 
So conclusion regarding opening study is that yes it is important - certainly much more than 1% significant and it is to be included along with all parts of the game. My weight of study should be directed towards tactics though still as a priority, but I can't afford to overlook other areas of the game either.
This is fine but 2 games lost from the opening from 35 is not twenty percent, its 5.71%. Have you done a study in an attempt to understand what types of openings you have more success with, open, semi or closed?
I was looking at some of the games of a friend I play on here, a lady, Sharon Carter, she is a 1400 rated player. She hardly ever loses a game in the opening. She might get slightly inferior positions but she does not blow the game in the opening and she knows practically NO opening theory.
So conclusion regarding opening study is that yes it is important - certainly much more than 1% significant and it is to be included along with all parts of the game. My weight of study should be directed towards tactics though still as a priority, but I can't afford to overlook other areas of the game either.
This is fine but 2 games lost from the opening from 35 is not twenty percent, its 5.71%. Have you done a study in an attempt to understand what types of openings you have more success with, open, semi or closed?
Yes, but the other percentage comes from notes like "poor position out of the opening" which led into slighly worse middlegames and I either slowly lost out as the game ebbed downhill or the game ended in a draw and in that game there might have been no significant tactical oversights, so I put down "opening" as the main factor. 20% is just a very rough estimate though granted as they all are.
I prefer open or semi-open games so I seek to direct openings that way. I have had trouble with closed games like the French (played 2, lost 2, same opponent higher rated) so now I have penciled in the exchange for future games as a stop gap.
I prefer open or semi-open games so I seek to direct openings that way. I have had trouble with closed games like the French (played 2, lost 2, same opponent higher rated) so now I have penciled in the exchange for future games as a stop gap.
Sure I can undertsand that I've had little success against the French myself, i played lots of games against a 2100 rated player and i got beaten again and again and again, it was soul destroying man! I even managed to get a position from the Tarrasch which i knew led to white being an exchange up and he went for it and still beat me up in the ending!
well you can't have a game if you don't start it
There are some idea here.
http://becomingachessmaster.com/2015/03/17/study-plan/
and here
http://becomingachessmaster.com/2015/03/22/my-chess-study-plan-opening-study/
There are some idea here.
http://becomingachessmaster.com/2015/03/17/study-plan/
and here
http://becomingachessmaster.com/2015/03/22/my-chess-study-plan-opening-study/
The cornerstone of the plan is endgame study. I spend most of my chess study time on the endgame. Second is tactics. This consists of practice, practice and more practice. Third is opening study.
I think that puts it in perspective.
Psychology comes into play when you have a choice between equal moves. Which move do you feel will give the opponent most chances of going wrong? Now don't go to extremes and knowingly play an inferior move for such like Lasker did but if it leaves you at least as well off as you are now then go for it. Just remember to calculate and make sure your initiative can be converted into a more permanent advantage. Or you could make a backward move in the name of reorganizing your pieces, the opponent will feel psychologically obligated to milk an initiative from such moves. Just make sure they don't have a real way to seize an advantage with such:
To the OP
I personally do not agree that playing with out the Queens is the best way to improve your chess. I believe the Queen can be a very effective unit.
However, Having said all of that I do realize often when people tell other people not to do something they usually don't listen and simply do the opposite. Or even worse they get more stubborn in their ways and continue playing the same way they always have played just to prove others wrong.
I once had a elderly man tell me a story of a lesson he learned in 1920-30. This story the elderly man told me happen many years ago at the time the elderly man was in his 80's. He told me a story about how his grandfather gave him a lesson in which he never forgot.
When the Elderly man was younger(a kid) he stayed with his Grandfather. His parents had died and he was a kid and the only person to look after him was his Grandfather.
One day he stole one of his Grandfathers cigars. His Grandfather liked to smoke. Well him being a kid he thought he would take one and smoke it with out his grandfather knowing.The Elderly man told me that at the time. he thought it seemed cool and alot of his grandfathers friends smoked so he thought it was cool and almost adult-ish.
Well his grandfather found out and his grandfather punished him. However, he punished him in a very unusual way. Back than their was no child abuse or any of that jazz. His grandfather bought a carton of cigars.
Not some small pack some huge pack of cigars. His grandfather said you want to smoke cigars? Well their you go. He locked him in his room and told him he could not come out until he finished every single one of those cigars. The Elderly man told me the 1st day he was happy that he got cigars like he wanted. He said after the 2nd day he hated cigars more than anything in life. He than said it took him over 3 days to finish all of those cigars. He said after he finished those cigars he never smoked again in his life. The mere sight of a cigar sickened him. He told me. He was 84 years old and the lesson his grandfather gave him happen when he was 14 over 70 years later he never touched a cigar, cigarette, or even liked the smell of smoke. He hated cigars and the smell of smoke. He said it was a lesson he learned the hard way that changed him for the better.
Now why am I telling you all of this? Well the Elderly man wanted a cigar. You wanted queenless positions. I am going to give you exactly what you want. You will have so many queenless positions. The mere sight of a queenless position will sicken you. An maybe just maybe your game will change for the better.
LOL thank you that was just what I needed and I still wanna smoke some more 
There are some idea here.
http://becomingachessmaster.com/2015/03/17/study-plan/
and here
http://becomingachessmaster.com/2015/03/22/my-chess-study-plan-opening-study/
Thank you for the info!
LOL thank you that was just what I needed and I still wanna smoke some more
We'll see even the Elderly man was happy the first day.
If you blunder in the middlegame the opening probably won't matter. You can end up in a situation in which your opening knowledge doesn't make up for your mistakes in the middlegame and your time will end up being used for the wrong things. This is one reason why openings become more important as your rating gets higher.
You shouldn't completely ignore them but there may be more efficient ways for you to improve.