Study the Middlegame!

What should someone study first? Endgame or Opening?

Neither of course. Fundamentals. First you must learn fundamentals... Fundamental openings, fundamental endings, fundamental tactics... (how to mate with a rook and king vs king is something you should learn after you learn how the pieces move. Putting the pieces into play, the relative value of the pieces, the concept of space, the basic importance of the center... all that beginner stuff. Once that is under the beginner's belt... and he plays several dozen games and realizes that he doesn't know how to play very well and needs to study something, then what should he study? Openings or Endings? 

Neither! Study the middlegame! Study positional chess!

Why? Why, why not start with the opening? Since the game starts in the opening and you have to pass thru the opening to get to the middlegame, why not work on openings first/ If your position is lost in the opening what difference does knowing the middlegame make?

That last bit sounds logical, indeed it is logical and rather persuasive ... until one realizes it rests on a flawed assumption: that it is possible to make any use at all of opening study without having a solid grasp of middlegame play. It isn't.

If you make gross tactical errors in the opening and get torn to shreds by pins and skewers and forks, that's not something you can fix with "opening" study... that's tactics. It's a predominantly middle game skill and you've got to drill it from day 1 on.  Studying openings to me means studying book moves, book responses, and further book moves, and further book responses, all in pursuit of an "edge" -- In my opinion, without basic middlegame chops this study is a waste of time (and I believe a lot of players are wasting their time this way, too).  What beginners constantly discover is that the other beginners they play leave book quickly and the poor booked up beginner then discovers he has no idea how to "take advantage" of the non-book move. Why not? Because he doesn't know positional chess,the move has positional defects and can only be exploited with that middlegame insight. Furthermore, what the beginner doesn't realize (because it happens so very very rarely) is that even when the improbable occurs, and they get their dream and the other beginner stays in book and goes down a line they know and like, the edge arrived at is a moderate strategic edge -- a middlegame positional edge, that can only be exploited with middlegame ideas! Since they don't have a grasp of those ideas, they throw away their advantage within three moves. But what am I talking about?! That just never happens. What actually happens is that when the other player does stay in book it's because they're an advanced player. And they pound the beginner mercilessly -- the instant the beginner leaves book -- because their sharp tactical vision combined with real understanding of positional chess lets them exploit the beginner's errors... The beginner gets creamed and thinks: jeez! the instant I left book I got hammered; I've just got to learn more book! Noooo.... learn what the advanced player knows: positional chess!

Secondly, all the principles of the middlegame work in the opening and help you play the opening correctly! If you have a truly strong grasp of positional chess you can play the opening like the middlegame and play fine at a strong club level. There used to be GMs not too long ago who played pretty much this way (Timman, a World Championship contender supposedly played this way, and Capablanca too, if one believes what one reads) ... ok, opening theory now has gotten to the point where this approach doesn't work at the elite level. Who cares!? We simply aren't discussing the elite level, none of this actually applies to anyone within sniffing distance of a master's title... we're talking about advanced beginners. Their opening play will improve by leaps and bounds when they have a start in positional middlegame strategy. (I'm not saying never study openings... I'm saying understand middlegame (positional) chess first; it's a prerequisite for opening study!) 

Summary: Until you have A) pretty solid tactical vision and B) solid basic middlegame understanding of positional chess you are wasting your time studying openings beyond basic "develop, control the center, etc."

Part II

Study the ending first?

Fundamentals, sure? You want to know basic mates. You want to know basic opposition... and I don't think time spent with King and pawn endings is wasted. A lot of games end up in King and pawn territory.  And yes, studying the endgame is great for learning about how pieces control space. (Because in the middlegame, pawns are constantly interfering and complicating the control of space, but in the ending you can get a much purer view) But for practical results, it's a fact you can't get to the endgame without passing thru the middlegame. So, ok, I believe in endgame study because I think it trains a certain discipline of mind. And yes, it's true, you can't understand the middlegame without understanding some basic endgame stuff: you've got to understand how weak pawns become game losing liabilities in the ending, you've got to understand how pawn majorities lead to passed pawns. But I classify that stuff as fundamental.  Everything else is advanced, technical ending stuff... that can wait, it can wait a long damn time, because it's just not the meat and potatoes that wins games for you.

Postional chess, (and the tactics that flow from it), is!

Finally, I've heard people say that Capablanca recommends studying endings first. Bullcrap! He recommends studying fundamentals first! The fundamentals of all three phases! That's why he calls his book, Chess Fundamentals... and it includes material on endings, middlegame, and openings. Once you've read and studied and assimilated your first chess book (and Chess Fundamentals is still a fine first chess book) -- and won a bunch of games and lost a bunch more, the question is: what to study next?  I say, not openings, not endings:  Positional chess aka middlegame strategy (and don't forget to drill tactics).

Thanks for your time and attention.

Doug.

There is no opening.  There is no endgame.  There is no spoon.

There is only the position.