I'm confused about white VS black's openings

I know how to play chess, but openings confuse me. I understand the concept of developing pieces, controlling the center, castling etc. but confused about white and black's motives in each of their openings. I guess my question is - does black's opening depend entirely on what white does? Can black's first few moves even be called an opening on its own or is it always called a defense because they move 2nd and have to counter what white is doing/has done? Are there a specific number of moves in a classic opening before it becomes called something else? Sorry if these are dumb questions, I'm just having trouble wrapping my head around what each player should be doing based on the OTHER player's moves. Thanks!

Chess is a game of two players and both need to react to what the other player has done. Neither white or black can play blindly by not thinking about what the other player did. Since White has the first move, they have the chance of attacking first and if they play actively, Black needs to defend first. Hence many openings are called defenses, though not all of them are only defensive. Any sequence of good and logical first moves has a name. You don't need to care about the names unless you want to - though knowing what they mean are useful in following chess commentators.
In all main line openings each move tries to accomplish something. Either control some squares, develop a piece to a useful square, threaten to capture something, defend against a threat or prevent the opponent from making some move you don't like.

Thanks, I guess it just takes time to sort through a few specific openings to start with and see what each side is trying to do. All these different openings are new to me, so I'm sure after some experience I'll figure things out!

The opening phase of a chess game is a dialogue between two players... not a monologue or a soliloquy.

Here's an example, using ordinary English instead of chess moves:

--------- ---------- --------- ---------- ---------- --------- -----------

Conversation #1:

Hare: Is it true that when one gets older, you have no worries?

Tortoise: To be precise, one has no frets.

--------- --------- --------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------

Conversation #2:

Hare: Aren't a fiddle and a violin pretty much the same?

Tortoise: To be precise, one has no frets.

--------- --------- -------- --------- --------- -------- ---------

Even though the "second player" (Tortoise) said precisely the same thing in both examples, the meaning was totally different.

So, too, in a chess opening.

its a give an take.  What each player does is a commitment that restrains the possibilities of a position, so each player aims for setups that are harmonious to their initial moves and takes into consideration your opponents formation. Where exactly opening ends and middlegame begins is somewhat of a fuzzy concept.

Idk how strong you are, but in general, good players play for superior moves as demanded by the position and dont try to psychoanalyze their opponents motives. After all, if you play strong moves and your opponent doesnt, it wont matter what he is thinking he is position will keep getting worse.

the whole opening vs defense thing can be a bit confusing at first. in general, opening is for white, and defense is for black in naming conventions, but it takes two to tango, and the names depend on what both sides play. (you often hear beginners say things like, for example "i like playing king's gambit vs sicilian" because the formation of the grand prix attack 1.e4 c5 2.f4 resembles the king gambit which is 1.e4 e5 2.f4, but this is a mistake, since the naming convention refers to what both sides play. in this case kings gambit refers only to 1.e4 e5 2.f4. But there is one major exception to this naming convention , which are "systems". Systems are opening/defenses which can be played almost on autopilot agaisnt a wide variety of your opponents replies. by their nature, they are easy to learn, and you can almost ignore what your opponent plays for a bit and get half decent positions.  Since they can be played agaisnt so many different replies they tend to be referred as "x system" regardless. For example, if white goes for a 1.d4 2.bf3 3.nf3 4.e3 5.c3 6.nbd2 7.h3 8.bd3 kind of formation (and often in systems even move order can be flexible) as white, its called a london system agaisnt most black replies.  But systems are more a family resemblance kind of term, so they dont always need to be EXACTLY as the cookie cutter textbook formation you see, for example, in the london system above, if white doesnt play h3, or if puts his bishop on e2 instead of d3, most people will still call it a london, but if white plays something like 3.nc3, then it changes the game substantially as the formation is very different, and its not a london system anymore.

Why are some black moves ("defences") described in the game, while in others, the white opening is described, e.g., queens' gambit declined juxtaposed with Car-Kann Defense, etc.?

Thanks in advance.

@6
++ When the defining move is a black move, then it is conventionally called a defense, e.g. French Defense, Caro-Kann Defense, Sicilian Defense, Petrov Defense, Berlin Defense, Two Knights Defense...
When the defining move is a white move, then it is conventionally called an opening, e.g. Ruy Lopez Opening, Italian Opening, Scotch Opening, Vienna Opening...
When a pawn is offered, then it is a gambit: King's Gambit, Queen's Gambit, Evans Gambit, Benkö Gambit, Jänisch Gambit...

Thx.

A lot of White lines are called Attacks as well

- Kings Indian Attack

- English Attack

- Yugoslav Attack

In chess, White is considered to have the advantage because White has starting move which gives them initiative.

The hidden rule is your supposed to try and win with White pieces.Your suppose to try and Draw with Black pieces. 

If you win with Black pieces, it is considered a bonus. It’s hard to win though if the player playing white is very good.

Not quite.

As White, you are supposed to try and press for a win right from the start.

As Black, you are supposed to first play to erode White's first-move advantage and equalize, then start maneuvering for the advantage... and once you gain it, THEN play to win.

Many of us just ignore that dogma and as Black play, not to equalize, but to complicate the game instead and to lead White into an unfamiliar jungle of variations where the path is only wide enough for one player.

"does black's opening depend entirely on what white does?"

If Black wants to squeeze the very maximum, then yes.

"Can black's first few moves even be called an opening on its own or is it always called a defense because they move 2nd and have to counter what white is doing/has done?"

It's always called a defense. Black doesn't have to counter what White is doing if their pieces are too far apart.

"Are there a specific number of moves in a classic opening before it becomes called something else?"

Where did you saw a classical opening being called something else? I think you saw a transposition.

"I'm just having trouble wrapping my head around what each player should be doing based on the OTHER player's moves. Thanks!"

You Do carry out your own plan, I personally try to think what's the worst thing the opponent can do to interrupt my plan, and if he can, and it's not a mistake of him, then I need to change a plan. Speed (number of moves) really matter in here. Look:

Each move is always an adaptation to the opponents previous move, and players must learn a number of different openings to cover each common combination of their opponents moves. That comprehensive moveset is called an 'opening repertoire'. Usually a repertoire is developed while consulting an openings database, which shows the frequency distribution of moves in a given position (there's a free one on lichess)... there are also programs that allow you to document your own opening move trees... lichess studies are an example of that.

Openings are really just a linguistic way of referring to common or significant early move combinations, but even within an opening the move tree will branch out into many variations and sub-variations based on what the opponent plays.
 Generally the opening is considered to have ended when all a players minor pieces are developed, which means moved off their starting squares. This usually takes until about move 8 or so, at which point the middlegame begins. But there isn't a definite rule for when the opening ends, and there are cases where pieces can remain undeveloped for quite a while.

You explained what I was trying to say a lot better.

It is a Dogma, but it is a Dogma which I believe is extremely accurate to chess. I, actually, have never tried ignoring it.

This is why I play openings like the Sicilian Najdorf (which has a very sound reputation, despite the crazy tactical lines) and the King's Indian Defense (which has a much less solid reputation, but does often lead into a tactical melee).

The KID might be considered questionable at the very top levels, but how often do you get to play super-GMs? Against players of our strength, it should be fine. I'm probably older than your parents, and I've only played one top-10 super-GM in my life... and was lucky enough to face an e4 opening instead of a d4 opening.

If KID = King's Indian Defense, then I dont understand what you're saying. AFAIK King's Indian is perfectly fine on higher levels, too. Maybe not in fashion right now, but that doesnt mean its not solid.

hello

How frequently is it played in World Championship competition? In the Candidates?

Has it even been played once in WCC competition since Anand lost the title a decade and a half ago?

Openings are considered once one or both sides are castled. Then you are in the middle game where knowing the pawn advances and piece maneuvers m to create and attack weaknesses.

There is an old chess book called Ideas Behind the Chess Openings by Reuben Fine, a World Championship contender from the 30s/40s. It's a bit dated for specific information, but the general ideas of why White puts whatever piece where or why Black does certain things in each opening really never changes. This book deals entirely with the question of the OP and it might be a good starting point.

@16

"How frequently is it played in World Championship competition? "
++ ICCF GM Nefedov played the King's Indian Defense twice in the 30th ICCF World Championship Finals to 2 losses.

https://www.iccf.com/game?id=948179

https://www.iccf.com/game?id=948250