At what point is it worth learning openings?

Title says all. Learning openings isn't good for beginners as mid-game blunders are the main problem. At what rating would you say it's worth concentrating on building a solid set of opening lines? My guess is somewhere between 1200 and 1400, but I have no idea (obviously...).

At the amateur level (below 2200 OTB rating), the answer is NEVER.

Gotta to work on the more fundamental skills first (tactics, endgames, positional assessment based on strategic principles and calculation) before ever studying openings. And for most folks, since they are always lacking in one or more of those other categories, the answer will always be “never.”

Generally, I have found that most people give veiled or confusing answers to this question that can be roughly translated into either: “400 points above your current level” —or— “When you get to MY level.”

But even Kasparov says all openings are sound below the GM level. So then why do IM’s, FM’s, NM’s, CM’s, Experts, and high-level class players study openings so much?

am new on chess com I am currently studying the fried liver attack but my opponents responses are never the same like on the YouTube videos. Any advice would be greatly appreciated

In my opinion, at any level. Personally, that was how I was taught chess growing up, and I think there are merits to learning a solid repertoire in that it allows players to be able to play the opening phase of the game more confidently. Yes, ultimately games won't be decided because of a good opening, but learning openings gets you accustomed to certain structures/positions, which allows for easier middlegame play. Tactics flow from superior positions, so I don't see any harm in having a solid opening repertoire.

I think it's probably useful for anybody to be able to identify certain openings, just because you'll be able to see what "normal-looking" openings look like and what "suspicious openings" look like.

And maybe it's useful for anyone hovering around 1800 to begin studying typical plans that arise from a couple openings that they play.

My guess is that actually knowing lines isn't useful below 2200/2300. But I don't play people in that range, so I wouldn't know for sure.

I do know that even in the 1900-2000 range, my games are not decided by knowing opening lines, and I have won many games with inferior opening prep and lost many games with superior opening prep.

I'd say learn a bit of openings even at a low rating, one should know what they prefer playing or what they want to avoid as white or black in the first few moves.

This is just my opinion (and I know it'll be unpopular) but I am only 890 rated but love studying openings.  Not too deep in theory but I pick 2 opening for White (for me it's KIA and Vienna Game/Gambit) and something vs 1.e4 and 1.4 for Black (I'm using C-K and the Slav).  

I know everyone says this is a waste of time at my rating and just to focus on tactics, blunder checks, puzzles, analysis, etc ( I do those things too) but I enjoy the confidence boost in knowing 6-7 moves deep of these 4 opening systems in the 4 or 5 most common variations.  This is not a huge amount of memorization and can be done in a short time (a week or two).  I'm sure the experts are right in that this may not be the fastest way to improve but if one, like me, enjoys the openings then I say go for it. 

I love Gothamchess's openings videos; the one thing I like about briefly learning various openings is understanding what they look like.  For example, if white plays 1 d4 and then shoots his dark squared bishop out, it's the London and I'll be playing against a big central triangle with a roving bishop outside of it.  Or the Italian with a tricky Bishop pointed at c2. Or the Dutch Stonewall tells me to setup to attack on Black's kingside.  Even at my low level, knowing these things helps me with setting up a rudimentary strategy, like which squares to set up my pawns on, which side to castle or attack, and which, if any, bishop I may want to trade off.  

Just throwing my 2 pennies worth out there and readily accept that this is likely to be met with a lot of criticism.

It's rarely worth your while to study opening variations 20 moves deep. You'll almost never follow theory that far. But it makes plenty of sense to study 5 moves deep, and then have a general idea of what plans to follow after that.

If you consistently get a decent position in the opening, then the opening phase isn't a problem for you. If you're getting crushed early, then look up where you're going wrong, and don't make the same mistake next time. In the process, you'll pick up a few moves of theory that actually are useful to you. 

#1
"At what point is it worth learning openings?"
++ "After you become a grandmaster" - Kasparov

You can learn any oepning at any level you want even if it's sicilian najdorf at 1000 if you are really learning it and not just playing it for the sake of bieng dead lost positionally on move 10 

Learn it and play it 

Anyway I would say at least 1000 because yeah untill 1000 it is better to have some solid openings  but mainly you can focus more tactics at that level and preventing hanging pieces

I agree you should start learn opening only and only if you understand it's basic principle  basic opening principles some common ideas of the opening not master but have a little bit grasp in tactics and endgame and middlegame plans and strategy if you know em all then u are ready to learn a certain opening 

And basically the elo in which you almost had this gap fullfilled is 13-1400 so u should focus on other basic principle of openings and basic principle of chess before 13-1400

After it u can go for certain openings assuming u have enough grasp of the 64 square games to understand the ideas and principle behind your favourite opening

As mastering certain opening gives you your own style of play and improves you chess concepts about endgames, strategies, principles even more

 

It all depends on what you mean by "learning the london". If you want to watch a couple of educational videos or read an article to know more about the opening, that is likely very useful. Not to mention that it is also fun.

On the other hand, if you sit down and start memorizing opening variations, that is just a waste of time. 

3 important tips to memorize variations in certain openings

• Feel the lines and visulaize them in your head or anywhere like hikaru does on ceilings
• Understand the ideas behind them 
• 3rd and most important use chessable 

Hmmm.... one answer I've read and like is: you should know a few openings a few moves deep at every level. How many moves deep? Divide your national OTB USCF (if you are in the US) rating by 200. So a beginner, rating 1000, should know the first 5 moves of the 4 knights for example. Along with that simple tactics, simple endgames, simple ideas of positional pay.

Sounds sensible. A lot of people when they say don't study openings seem to still expect you to know the first five moves and basic ideas at least of openings by some sort of osmosis. Learning openings can also be very instructive, whether for strategic considerations or tactics. I think it's a mistake to just make moves that look reasonable from the very beginning which is what I did for years.

 

I started and consistently play the London as white. Sicilian okelly against e4 and Slav against d4 (which has similar elements as the London) I know many tricks and traps in each and have studied main lines. I did this since the beginning. It is and was super helpful to have near universal openings to develop positional understanding and the value of pieces trades and pawn structures.

If you are a very new player- familiarize yourself with the opening principles that @pfren linked. If you want to look at some openings, go ahead, but only look for the first few moves and try to find the idea of the opening. Nothing more than that is really necessary; although as you improve you will naturally need to improve your opening play as well.

We are not Kasparov, though. And we will never be.

Yeah chessable is the best for learning openings 

And yes learning good opening does make you better player as you know more strategy in certain prepared positions like minority attack in qgd and is definitely a thing to learn but some people do consider learnimg opening trash but either u agree or not it  is usefull

OK, so the message I'm getting here is that no two people can really agree. Also, I find it hilariously elitist that everyone below 2200 OTB are all amateurs.