don't want to learn names of openings

Here's my question: can someone become a good (even really good) chess player without learning the names and historical theories behind all the famous openings?  How good can you get just by playing the game?

The short answer is that if you are the really good player 2000+ then you will know the names.  The reason is more from experience than anything that you learn by doing and when you play good people you need to know how to confront the ideas that they throw at you. You will learn names, but the most important thing is the ideas and the most important thing there is remembering.  You will learn the difference between a Ruy Lopez aka spanish game (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5) and an open Sicilian(1. e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3. d4) They start the same but branch.  If neither of these strings of numbers mean anything to you here is your action plan from me.

1. Learn NOTATION, algebraic (above) or old school (1. NQR3)

2. Learn one opening in the 1.e4 variation and learn how to counter the most popular responses 1...c5,e5 and if you want to be extra diligent e6.

3. Learn one system as black against the e4 and d4 openings. 

4. Start to use this site to its fullest. Use the tactics trainer and the Chess mentor and watch the movies that the GMs give us. 

5. PLAY! Like I said you learn by doing and that means practice like any other sport. Use you knowledge and look to improve what you have

Im a bit off topic. 

By just playing you can get to a respectable level.  I know people that beat me all the time OTB and have never read a chess book.  This is because they think the way that they need to, moves in advance. The key thing isnt to know what the name of the opening your opponent is playing but why you opponent made his last move where youre gonna move and where and how he/she will counter.  Any questions contact me and if you want free coaching to a decent level drop me a comment or note. Best of luck

You'll pick them up while studying other stuff. But it's very hard to get good just by playing, when everybody else does puzzles, plays through commented games etc and generally takes advantage of the existing centuries of chess knowledge.

There is no need to start out memorizing stuff. That can wait until you're way over 2000. But there is a large middle between memorizing books and only playing :-)

This is just wrong. That is basically still IN the opening. Most openings lead to very recognizable middlegames. Sometimes you can even tell from the ending! The only problem is that some openings can lead to similar types of middle games, but even then, after 10/12 moves it should be pretty easy.

The only caveat is that they should be games by relatively high rated players, who have an idea of what they're supposed to be doing in the openings they play.

So give us a few positions to try :-)

yes you can learn the openings and learn from them without knowing the names. 

Remember...

Shakespeare said, hundreds of years ago, "What's in a name? A rose is a rose is a rose. A rose BY ANY OTHER NAME, would smell as sweet".

Still true today.

Knowing the names just helps in communicating succinctly with others what you mean.

My 2 cents.

Then don't.

In the opening is very important to understand idea behind it. I doesn't matter if you don't remember the name of opening. Remember the name is not the problem, if you understand it, you'll remember the name, I'm sure. You can improve only by playing, but strong club level you'll lose if you don't understand openings and positions after 8-12 moves.

I think; the stronger player the strategic game. So I recommend to study the opinings.

I doubt any modern grandmasters get away without knowing the names. Well, they may not know the names that chess.com uses for some of the more obscure variations. In order to learn about something you kinda need to know what it is called.

Knowing the names of the openings will at the end of the day prove to be more useful than playing on your own mind, recieving no input from anywhere else.

I, myself, am not a skilled player, but I have found it very worthwhile to seek knowledge elsewhere than what can be boiled up lonely in my brain.

First of all, learning opening theory will do nothing but help you. More time should be spent on tactics and endgames, but that doesn't mean that ignoring the opening is ok. It all depends on how much better you want to be.

Learning names of openings will come naturally. You will either see it enough that it will be connected with a sequence of moves. 

But learning opening names is important because it will help you organize the ideas. I think Ruy Lopez Exchange instead of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6

Personally, I find the names interesting because of their rich connection to the history of chess. All of the great chess players have an opening named in their honour. 

Yes, you could, theoretically, learn everything there is to know about chess without ever opening a book, doing a puzzle, or memorizing a line.

It will simply take you three times longer. Why reinvent the wheel? It is much easier to reach the chess stratosphere while standing on the shoulders of the giants that came before you than to try to go it alone.

Yes, bobbereight is right. Many top rated player have said "stydying chess, begin from end of game, but don forget the opening"

I has been stuborn and spitting into the wind my hole life.

then I heard the line by Newton about standing on the sholders of giants

the wheel has been invented, use it.

g

Not knowing the names of the openings is the same thing as not knowing the names of the streets, subway stations, landmarks, etc. in your area. Though maybe successfully finding the grocery store and the gas station. Weird and very unproductive.

If you are going to quote Shakespeare, don't paraphrase. What Juliet (Shakespeare) said was:

"What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet."