Good positional openings for a beginner?

Hello

I just started to really study chess a week or two ago, and so far the opening I've used the most is the London system. I like it because it's easy to develop my bishops and get good center control, but I've been getting bored with playing the same moves every game and I'm looking to expand my repertoire a little. Does anyone have any suggestions on some good positional openings that I should look into?

I would suggest  you Queen's Gambit, King's Indian attach i also good,against a good player for me London System is hopeless

Play e4, study tactics, read a book (on chess). Your good to play.

Well if you are just a beginner, I do not suggest you play a main line opening with a ton of theory (you really should only starting learning a lot of theory at around 1900-2000.) So do not listen to the other 2 guys.

If you wish to play positional, 1. d4 is the best way to go. Now if you do not wish to learn a lot of theory, play a system (London System, Colle System, Torre Attack/System, etc.) I do not like London System all too much, and the Torre Attack is quite more complex than it looks, and I do not suggest it for a beginner. As a result, I suggest you play the Colle System (which is what I played before I switched to the Queen's Gambit, which you can do when you are about 1800.)

The Colle System is signified by the follwing moves: 1. d4, 2. Nf3, 3. e3, 4. Bd3, 5. 0-0, 6. Nbd2, 7. c3 (if black ever plays c5) and then 8. e4 (which may or may not be supported by Qe2 and/or Re1. Here's an example:

Against 1... Nf6, and interesting system to look at is 2. Bg5!? (the Trompowsky.) It might require some studying, but not quite as much as playing against the KID, Modern Benoni, etc.

Against 1... f5 (the Dutch), an interesting system is also playing 2. Bg5!? (with the idea of 2... h6 3. Bh4 g5 4. e3! (threatning Qh5#). The main line then follows: 4... Nf6 5. Bg3 d6 6. h4 Rg8 (6... g4!?) 7. hxg5 hxg5 8. Nc3 (8. Nd2 and 8. Bc4) with an interesting game.

If you want more information on either of these openings, just ask.

Thanks man, that looks like something I could definitely work with. Why is it that one should not learn a lot of theory until they're 1800-2000? Do you not get all of the benefits until you have that much experience?

 Well, this question is difficult to answer. Some of it is my own experience (I reached 2000 with studying much theory at all.)

One of the reasons for not learning opening theory at your level is that it is simply unnecessary. Anybody can learn a bunch of moves from a book or from software and memorize. They can certainly get a good position coming into the middle game. But if you don't know how to play the middlegame (or the endgame), how will you ever capitalize on your advantage?

Because of this, it is more important to learn tactics (for the middlegame) and learn how to play the endgame. Here's some steps to improving:

1. Learn all of the very basic positions in endgames (i.e. mating a lone king with a queen, with 2 rooks, with 1 rook, and with 2 bishops. note that you do NOT need to learn how to mate with a knight and bishop, as it is complex, and anyways, it rarely happens.)

2. Begin solving tactics puzzles. I can't think of any good tactics books off the top of my head (but they certainly do exist.) Personally, I would use tactics software. A company that makes good chess software (and I don't mean to advertise; I actually their software myself and highly reccomend it) is Convekta (http://chessok.com/). A good starting software is called Chess School for Begineers. It is perhaps engineered towards absoluter beginners (who don't know the rules), but it does have some interesting content and puzzles.

          If the above software is a little too simple for you, the next one you should go to is called Chess Tactics for Beginners (note that these are all by Convekta.) This one starts out with basic mate-in-1-puzzles, but then progresses to more complex ones, such as mate in 2 and winning pieces.

          There 2 more good software after this 1 (Chess Tactics for Intermediate Players and CT-Art 3.0, with 4.0 just coming out.) However these are much more difficult (especially the latter, which is SUPER difficult.) We can talk when you get stronger.

           As for how to solve these problems, you could just casually do them. However, the purpose of these programs is not just to do the problems, but to also REMEMBER the positions. This is called pattern recognition. Pattern recognition means that the tactics are burned into your head; if you were to see them on the board, you will instantly see the tactic(s).

           A way to "burn" these positions in your head is something I stole from an old coach of mine. What he would do was set a chess clock beside me (or a timer of any sort), and start it. I would then proceed to do 25 positions, one after another. If I were to make ever ONE mistake, I had to redo all 25 positions. This way, the tactics would get burned into my head. It maybe tedious, but you will improve vastly.  

3. After learning the basic endgames, begin to expand your knowledge a little more. A good book to help you with this is called Silman's Complete Endgame Course (http://www.amazon.com/Silmans-Complete-Endgame-Course-Beginner/dp/1890085103) This book is organized by rating levels, so you know which endgames to study. This book really is the only endgame you will need until you reach 2000 (in which case you should get Dvortsky's Endgame Manual (http://www.amazon.com/Dvoretskys-Endgame-Manual-Mark-Dvoretsky/dp/1888690283/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1282193952&sr=1-1), but this is more complex, and I won't go in depth right now.

4. Study just a little bit of openings, only enough to get you by. You can ask any opening questions to me, as I have a wide range knowledge of them and have seen many of them before.

As before, if you have any questions, just ask.

e4 e5, Center Game, Scotch Game, Giuoco Piano.

Learn a few moves for these openings and try to play them, and add to your knowledge as you meet new variations within them.

Do tactics exercises.

From there just work hard and grow naturally. Ask for more advice here as you go along (some of which will be bad and wrong, if our expectations will be met by past experience).

So, ask and wait and read. The good stuff rises to the top eventually.

I suggest drop the London System altogether and don't get into ANY of the minor-d4 lines. IF you are going to improve, you need to know that

1)Tactics come before positional play-they are the basis for it

2) Have to play strong, not passive moves and actually strive for advantages as White

So basically, I suggest studying main line 1.e4 for now (so no KIA or system openings..). Choose a sideline against Sicilian if you wish-pick the Alapin Sicilian. Play main lines, maybe Advance vs. French and the list goes on. Focus on tactics+1.e4 e5. You want positional? Theres the Ruy but its quite advanced (although I guess you could look for lines you understand) I think so you can start with something like Scotch or Giuoco Piano

If you do one day decide to switch to 1.d4 NEVER EVER play minor-d4 lines like Colle, Torre, London, etc. Head straight into the Queens Gambit and 2.c4. This is more popular more a reason: its better and as Cox says in Starting Out:1.d4, you NEED to play stronger moves in order to be a better player. Those d4 minor lines  are crap compared to 2.c4. Feel free to disagree, but its a known fact that they aren't as good. Not to mention, the QG doesn't get boring like the London or Colle. Don't forget, even if you haven't mastered the in's and out's of the QG (or any other theoretical opening), chances are that your opponents around the same strength as you haven't either so you'll be fine.

And about the advice of not studying openings until 1800-1900, , I think one can study openings as early as 1500-1600 USCF as long as they do it in moderation.

what everyone else has said-

just focus on tactics and look for the objectively best move. for openings look to learn a little of the symmetrical stuff, but dont memorize too deep. just see why its played by strong players and the principle invovled.. for example the London system doesnt really have that good of central control as its only getting one pawn in the center. d4 openings white plays c4 quickly, and in e4 openings white will try to get d4 in. why? 2 pawn centers are important :)

play slightly stronger players.

study tons of tactics.

take time to learn from your losses.

 When I mean study openings, I mean expand your openings greatly and begin to learn many lines. This is not necessary when you are 1500-1600. I've been through all of this before, and I know it simple unnecessary to study openings before 2000.

I agree with most of the posters here. Study tactics, play open games, learn from your mistakes. It is good to get blown off the board once in a while, because you will learn from it, and that will happen in tactical positions that usually arrive from 1.e4! Don't worry about being a "tactical" or "positional" player either. Just focus on the best moves, and remember, unless you are a grandmaster you are too weak to have style!

Also, stay away from those 1.d4 sidelines. Those are truley openings for men without any testicular fortitude! If you do decide on 1.d4, make sure your next move is 2.c4 because that is the only way you are going to get an edge, and more importantly, an exciting game!

I don't think games between beginners are decided by White converting the advantage of having the first move, ever. So studying openings at that level is not necessary. Learning normal traps that can happen early in the game, forks, skewers, and tactics is much more important, as that will actually win you games. The opening will not win you games, and does not repay study. It will seem like it does because you will feel like you know what you are doing for the first few moves of the game, but then your opponent will play something you haven't seen before, or you will run out of theory, and not know what to do unless you have truly learned to understand the position, something that most players do not even do when they learn openings. This (positional understanding) comes with a lot of experience, and it is because of this that opening study under, say, 2000, cannot really be recommended.

Tactics and endgames definitely repay study and are important building blocks toward becoming a good chess player. I think this is all you really need to study. Especially tactics...but if your tactic gets you into a pawn-up endgame, you do need to know how to win it. (Note that this isn't necessarily enough of an advantage to win, but in most cases it is.)

some basic sicilian always helps, caro kann is also strong for black and avoid gambits 

I do like the Caro-Kann for Black for beginners, but learning the Open Games and the Closed Games (e4 e5 and 1.d4 openings in general) are pretty important as well, at least learning the ideas of developing the pieces and castling, and when tactics do and don't work, and how to develop your game...but actually memorizing theory does not have a place in the study of someone learning the game.

Couldn't have said it better.

 No. The general consensus of strong players is NOT necessarily to play 1. e4. They tell you to play what you are comfortable with playing. Play 1. e4 if you are looking for a open, more tactical game. Play 1. d4, 1. c4, or 1. Nf3 if you want to play more positional (although that doesn't mean either of the two options can go either way; 1. e4 can become positional and 1. d4, etc. can become tactical.) Realize that just because you play e4, doesn't mean it's for everyone.

If you disagree, I would like you to show me somebody who tells beginners to play main line e4 openings.

Plus, you are acting as if systems can't teach you anything. Realize that the point of learning systems are:

1. They're easy to learn.
2. You don't have to do so much studying.
3. You can get a relatively good position out of the opening, without too much risk.

Teaching a beginner to play a sharp, complex line in the Richter-Rauser against the Scillian wrong. And anyways, I do not know of a good anti-scillian that doesn't require a lot of studying (2. c3 is more complex then it looks; the Smith-Morra is theoretically good for black; the Wing Gambit is unsound, etc.)

Learning a system is bad for a begginer PERIOD. Getting exposed to patterns of many different positions is how you get better. I say play mainline sicilians, heck mainline anything, stuff that makes sense under the principles you know. Also e4 is best for the developing player (closed positions take alot of experience to know what to do).

I also seriously dought your comment that you are 2000 strength.

 I realize what you are trying to say about learning a system. It is quite true that they are not the strongest openings. But realize that your idea of learning main line chess openings is WRONG. I do not know why you simply can't understand this. It is completely impractical for a beginner to learn how to play main line openings. It doesn't teach him anything.

Why do you doubt that I'm 2000? If you want proof we can play a game if you want.

I think the goal of the OP is clear.

It isn't to play and win, it's to play and learn the lessons he needs at this stage, and to keep on playing.

All he needs is to win enough to keep interest.

e4 e5 etcetera for this one.

 Ok, I have some mistakes to admit myself, but you are still wrong in some points.

1. You are misunderstanding what I said. I'm not telling anybody to play 1. b4 or anything like that. I'm telling them this player specifically that he should keep on playing 1. d4 because that's what he normally plays.

See, in my opinion, the best opening for a beginner to play is the Ruy Lopez. It exposes them to various types of positions. However, dunjenmaster is a 1. d4, and there is absolutely NO reason for changing that. In my opinion, 1. d4 is and equally good opening to learn various positions.

I think a mistake that you are making is that you are concerning yourself too much over the opening. I believe that a beginner should learn opening only to "get by," and nothing more than that.

2. I would much rather you give me a concrete example (reference a book or something other source) rather than give me names. I know both Seirawan and Silman and know they are good teachers. But give me something concrete.

3. This is where I made a mistake. The reason I recommend playing a system is that I had great success playing one before (the Colle.)

However, I realize that this is faulty thinking on my part. It's true that systems are not for everyone, and not everyone will be successful with them.

You are also wrong in some places, though. First of all, tell me why a beginner wouldn't understand why they lost had they played a system.

Also your example of the Modern Opening makes no sense. I never recommended the Modern and it has no place here.

Give me an example of a "classical chess opening" that you think a beginner should learn.

4. Once again, give me an example of a good opening.

And also once again, no one recommended playing 1. g3.

Overall, I think your mistake (and I'm restating this again) is that you are placing too much emphasis on the opening. Let the player play something that he likes to play. He should get a totally OK position where he can then outplay his opponent. He needs to learn more tactics and endgames and not bother too much with openings.

And about the rating comment, why would I ever lie about my rating? What's in it for me? (btw, I'm not that 1800 you were talking about.)