HEY NOOBS! Forget Openings, Study Tactics (The right way)

"Perhaps of interest to look at the table of contents in the book sample here:

http://www.gambitbooks.com/pdfs/A_Complete_Chess_Course.pdf " - kindaspongey (~1 hour ago)

You feel there should be no questions if you make comments about the experts and most people?

I didn't make comments about the experts,I simply said,if you do your research then you would find out that the experts agree with me or I with them,that's it that's all,why is that so hard for you to understand? 

I'm done talking about this as you're aggravating me by bombarding me with nitpicking questions,we can move passed this,the bottom-line is I believe that the BEST thing for beginners to study is tactics,I've said this how many times?  Openings are only beneficial at the higher levels of Chess,there is solid evidence to back this up,so my suggestion to you would be to,instead of trying to argue with me on Chess.com, do your research and you'll see that what I'm saying is true,if not,we don't have anything else to talk about do we? .......Stop bothering me with your 21 different questions,if you don't agree with me then just leave it be! 

Oh and by the way sending me a book sample,that's not research,so now,I'm thinking,you need to look up the word research,find out what it means,yeah you can ask someone if you want,then research "What should beginning Chess players study" and see what you come up with,or you can type in " Should beginners study Chess Openings" and again,see what you come up with.  So until you do that thoroughly,you and I don't have anything else to talk about,so you can stop quoting my posts,because I'm done with answering you,do the research and then get back to me kk? ....

Chesslover0_0 wrote: "I didn't make comments about the experts, …"

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Why do you feel that you can say what others would find out from research?

For this evidence, how many specific locations have been identified by you?

"... This book is the first volume in a series of manuals designed for players who are building the foundations of their chess knowledge. The reader will receive the necessary basic knowledge in six areas of the game - tactcs, positional play, strategy, the calculation of variations, the opening and the endgame. ... To make the book entertaining and varied, I have mixed up these different areas, ..." - GM Artur Yusupov

Ugh,....just leave me alone please,thanks! 

Not sure if I agree with the creator of the thread, yes all my positions have been lost to tactics but I have lost games due to falling into bad positions from inferior opening knowledge and had to suffer against master level players as a result. I think this applies at all levels though.
Beginners don't need to study the openings as in depth but some opening knowledge never hurt anyone.  They don't need to know 15 moves of theory in a Berlin or Dragon but it can't hurt as long as they put time into the middle game, endgame and tactics as well.
I did break 2100 with poor openings but it does show against 2200+ players, sometimes I even have to trick players below 2000 in worse position to win or defend like my life depends on it to draw.

Agreed,I think instead of studying Openings you should teach a player the purpose of the Opening or what the main strategy of the opening,that's good enough.  I mean if you're a beginner what's the purpose of knowing some super complicated line of the French from Black's perspective if 9 times out of 10 you're never going to go into this variation with your opponent,also a beginner.  

Let's contrast that with tactics,that same opponent,my opponent may however fall into a knight fork right,much more simple and it wins material in most cases.  Now MikeZeggelaar,I appreciate your honestly,most of your games you lost because of tactics right?,we've all been there,so it just doesn't make sense to know these things right now,outside of the basics.  I know of the Ruy Lopez,the King's Indian,the Nimzo-Indian and the French defense,I know them by name and very little about the Opening but who am I? I'm just another Grand-Patzer just like the rest of us here,but I can also tell you what a skewer,fork,pin,discovered attack,double check and Philidor's Legacy (Smothered mate), Boden's Mate and the list goes on and on,my point is,I know much more about Chess tactics then I do about Openings,but I develop my pieces like it's going out of style each game I play,should I know more? Maybe,would I like to know more,yes I would like to at some point,do I need to know more now at my currently level?? Hmm probably not,because I'll say it again and this is what I've been trying to get these other guys to understand,people aren't going to play that 15 move line that you memorized,studied,they just aren't because they don't know it themselves!!!,again this ONLY applies to at least the majority of beginners,so when you know this,and you use your brain,you'll see that studying Openings as a beginner is all but useless!  

Openings= DEVELOP YOUR PIECES OR Develop your damn pieces OR Develop your pieces NOW! Whichever you prefer good kind sir .....that's 80% of the opening,other rules include,castle,move each piece once etc.,that's good enough man!  However,apparently not everyone on this thread agrees with me,I got dudes singing 50 cents' 21 Questions to me here,nitpicking but why? Agree to disagree and let the sh** go,it's that simple!! 

This Chesslover have an aggressive tone that I don’t like so much. He is talking likemhe would be a rather strong and experienced player and likemhe would have done a lot of „research“ in Chess.

Well, I checked his profile and I was surprised to see that he is a beginner. Most of the time he is playing bullet against other beginners, and his openings are just ridiculous.

You know what? Go on telling people rated 500 points higher than you that study openings are not relevant, and go on playing bullet most part of the time. You will never improve doing this, of course, but who cares, right? And I am going to unfollow this thread, yImhavembettermthingsmtomdo with my time.

Are those the only two alternatives?

"... Overall, I would advise most players to stick to a fairly limited range of openings, and not to worry about learning too much by heart. ..." - FM Steve Giddins (2008)
"... I feel that the main reasons to buy an opening book are to give a good overview of the opening, and to explain general plans and ideas. ..." - GM John Nunn (2006)
"... If the book contains illustrative games, it is worth playing these over first ..." - GM John Nunn (2006)
"... the average player only needs to know a limited amount about the openings he plays. Providing he understands the main aims of the opening, a few typical plans and a handful of basic variations, that is enough. ..." - FM Steve Giddins (2008)
"... Everyman Chess has started a new series aimed at those who want to understand the basics of an opening, i.e., the not-yet-so-strong players. ... I imagine [there] will be a long series based on the premise of bringing the basic ideas of an opening to the reader through plenty of introductory text, game annotations, hints, plans and much more. ..." - FM Carsten Hansen (2002)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627055734/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen38.pdf
"The way I suggest you study this book is to play through the main games once, relatively quickly, and then start playing the variation in actual games. Playing an opening in real games is of vital importance - without this kind of live practice it is impossible to get a 'feel' for the kind of game it leads to. There is time enough later for involvement with the details, after playing your games it is good to look up the line." - GM Nigel Davies (2005)
"... Review each of your games, identifying opening (and other) mistakes with the goal of not repeatedly making the same mistake. ... It is especially critical not to continually fall into opening traps – or even lines that result in difficult positions ..." - NM Dan Heisman (2007)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627062646/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman81.pdf

Most of the time, one faces a position with no knowledge of a specific move indicated in a book. One has to accept that as part of chess, and think of opening knowledge as a sometimes helpful aid.

"... Review each of your games, identifying opening (and other) mistakes with the goal of not repeatedly making the same mistake. ... It is especially critical not to continually fall into opening traps – or even lines that result in difficult positions ..." - NM Dan Heisman (2007)

https://web.archive.org/web/20140627062646/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman81.pdf

Perhaps of interest to look at the table of contents in the book sample here:

http://www.gambitbooks.com/pdfs/A_Complete_Chess_Course.pdf

A lot of people see the world or black or white. In most discussions on openings for beginners you will find the same pattern. Guy 1 says that openings are not relevant for beginners. Guy 2 says that well, tactics are of course important, but  some basic knowledge on opening is useful. Guy 1 replies that he cannot agree with guy 2 because focusing exclusively on openings is very bad. Guy w replies that he didn’t say that tactics are not important, and he didn’t say that novices should only do openings.

and so on

I have  have the impression that a lot of people in the forum have a serious problem with logic or with listening or both.

I agree with almost everything what the OP wrote at the beginning. I just want to say that it is also useful for a beginner to learn a basic opening repertoire as long as he will not begin to invest too much time in the openings.

"Guy w"?

By the way, I have been meaning to ask you: Is it your hands on the player piano in Westworld?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbbENlVysmI

Good post, btw, I played you in bughouse

Most of the time, one faces a position with no knowledge of a specific move indicated in a book.

Might an opening book help a beginner to identify mistakes and understand what to do about them?

Is this a person seeking to train titled players?

Perhaps of interest to look at the table of contents in the book sample here:
http://www.gambitbooks.com/pdfs/A_Complete_Chess_Course.pdf