Opening Systems for White and Black

classical, hypermodern, gambits, its all good.  If you want to play queen pawn the Colle proper is a good starting point, then you can learn other stuff like Stonewall, London, Zukertort etc cause they all kinda related but have different nuances and their own theory, Queens Gambit has huge amount of theory.  If you want to cut it down you can play the same system with black as you do with white, for example the Colle proper is just the Semi slav with reversed colours.  Either way at our measly level openings is probably the last thing we should be worrying about cause hardly any games are lost in the opening outright.

"... 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

Chess knowledge is not the same thing as chess skill.  I just thought I'd point that out.  Its not aimed at anyone.

An opening is the first however many moves played before the middle game is reached. A specific opening (usually named) is any recognized position arising after some number of moves by both sides. For instance, The position created by 1.e4 c5 is the Sicilian Defense, while the position created by 1.d4 c5 is the Benoni Defense, and similarly for 1.e4 e5 2.f4, which is the King's Gambit, but so also would be the position arising after this different move sequence: 1.e3 e6 2.e4 e5 3.f4.

An opening system in the context of this post is an opening setup by one side that is played against pretty much anything your opponent does, with only minor adjustments, if any. For example, 1.Nf3 2.g3 3.Bg2 4.0-0 5.d3 could be played against almost anything Black could come up with in the first three moves.

It seems to me that there is some variation from one person to another as to how to interpret "opening setup", "pretty much", and "only minor adjustments".

With regards to the Semi-Slav being usable as a "system", yes; if you have one of the later versions of Chessmaster that come with Waitzkin's annotated games, you will see that he used a Semi-Slav Meran setup not only against 1.d4 but also against 1.c4, and you can well imagine there isn't much White could do short of exchanging on d5 early on to prevent you from playing the setup, so it can be used as a universal defense of sorts. In fact, it works especially well against the Grob, in my experience, but as always just be careful about castling too early.

As far as the London not working against the Modern, see my post in which I mention some lines being problem areas. That will happen in EVERY opening repertoire no matter what, so you just live with it. The Modern could refer to many things, but I am assuming you mean a very early kingside fianchetto with ...d7-d6 and without an early ...Ng8-f6 and with late or no castling kingside. It's best to modify the setup somewhat, but it's playable in any case - you just need to watch out for ...e7-e5 hitting the Bf4 followed by ...e5-e4 forking Bd3 and Nf3. So it's a good idea to play h2-h3 if Black's knight has gone to f6, and it may be best to prefer Bf1-e2 instead of Bf1-d3. But both of those modifications are still well within the standard London setup. Further, I would prefer to play c2-c4 instead of c2-c3, and Nb1-c3 instead of Nb1-d2, which is also good against the King's Indian Defense. Since I also play 1.e4, I can play 1.d4 g6 2.e4 or 1.d4 Nf6 2.Bf4 g6 3.Nc3, and if Black doesn't go in for 3...d5 or something forcing, I play 4.e4. But that's all just refinements that you don't need to worry about at first. At first, just complete your setup making sure to avoid tactical blunders, and no matter what, you should have at least equality against anything Black plays, including the Modern, the KID, the Gruenfeld, or whatever else.

White has two sore spots in the London: the Bf4 and the pawn it left undefended on b2. Almost all of the tactics in Black's favor involve one or both of those, so they're relatively easy to avoid.

Note that the Colle and Colle-Zukertort avoid both of those, but come with other concessions.

I really don't care what anyone thinks about how well the London works against this or that particular line; since I started using it in the vast majority of my games, and studying the middlegame positions I have entered, my results have become FAR more consistently good.

I am not sure what you want to know. My guess is that you are wanting to know if Black can obtain a reasonable game playing 1...d5 and 2...c6 against 1 d4, followed by "pretty much" any White second move. I do not know the answer, but I would note that the answer might depend on your interpetaion of "reasonable game",  "pretty much", and "Semi-Slav". If White does not play c4 at a pretty early stage, I think that many of us would hesitate to say that the game might qualify as a Semi-Slav. Oddly enough, there was a recent Semi-Slav book that undertook to also help the reader to be prepared for games where white played 1 d4 and not 2 c4. However, I think that that material was viewed as a bonus for the reader and not part of the Semi-Slav instruction.

http://www.chess-stars.com/resources/contents_black_rep_d5c61.pdf

The Colle-Zukertort Is a sound choice. Yusupov covers it in one of the chapters in his great series of  9 books. With that recommendation I would go right ahead and study it . Let me know if the points start clocking up.

Quite true ... and as the meanings of those phrases vary, so does my intended message. Thus, I answered the question as if it were asked by hundreds of different people with hundreds of different understandings of terminology, and for the most part, I am happy with whatever message was received.

Incidentally, I feel like people usually consider me to be too pedantic, so for once it's nice to err on the side of perhaps not precise enough.

I was not trying to complain about a lack of precision. I was just trying to point out that the idea was such that different people might come to different conclusions about what counts as a system.

I'd say that in the context of this thread, the only meaning that matters is Chicken_Monster's, which I hope I've understood properly, but if not, my response was hopefully flexible enough anyway.

For my part, when answering a question about whether or not something is a system, the first thing to emphasize is the uncertainty about how the word is being used. See my post, about 23 minutes ago, for example.

The way jlconn defined system comports exactly with my understanding of the term. Maybe some have a different opinion on what "system" means. Likewise, some will disagree with the argument about whether chess is a sport and how to mince garlic or anything else. I thought the following post by ThrillerFan relating to when you should or should not implement the Colle-Zukertort or the London System was interesting ("Colle Zukertort doesn't work if Black hasn't played ...d5 and ...e6

...").

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/colle-system-or-london-system

You'll note that Magnus correctly used the Colle-Zukertort in this famous game (even though he lost)

https://en.chessbase.com/post/newsblog-wcc-carlsen-karjakin-2016-11-22        

Nevertheless, as previously noted, the definition used ideas whose meaning might vary from person to person. About 10 hours ago, you asked, "can the Semi-Slav be considered a 'system' against 1.d4?" As near as I can tell, jlconn (~5 hours ago) took your question as being about going for the Semi-Slav after 1 d4 or 1 c4. I took your question as being about going for the Semi-Slav after 1 d4 d5 2 Bf4, 1 d4 d5 2 e3, 1 d4 d5 2 Nc3, etc. (various alternatives to 1 d4 d5 2 c4). I do not know which interpretaion is correct, but it seems to me that both are plausible and might have very different answers.

Do yourself a favor and watch this YouTube video (second link) before more opening study.

Video on Openings for Beginners

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/video-on-openeings-for-beginners

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=8&v=21L45Qo6EIY

Again, it seems to me that the answer to such questions depends on how one interprets such things as "opening setup", "pretty much", and "only minor adjustments".

I think 1.  e4 e6 2.  d4 d5 3.  e5 c5 4.  c3 Ne7

(plug that into google)

is an opening called the French, but I'll let the more advanced guys answer that. Maybe it can be used as a system...

Again, not really sure what you want to know, but my guess is that, in the French, most people would consider White's choices to have a lot of potential to require major adjustments on the part of Black.

I guess I'm confused. You said you are "just starting out in chess." However, your USCF is 1500 and you joined chess.com in 2015. I think you know a lot more than I do. I don't know much about the French.

Where? I am guessing that you are confusing me with someone else.