You can't survive without one above 2000 over the board. You should probably start establishing one around 1700 or so.
Oh, and base it on soundness, not trickery. If you think you are going to get away with playing rare, offbeat, unsound lines, think again. People that are 2100 are too good to fall for garbage tricks, and usually if defended correctly, you end up with a worse position.
The most dangerous player in chess is not the one who have won 1000 games but the one who have won 100 times the specific variation you play. With that in mind, do the best you can. Chess knowledge never ends.
yay
Pretty much every player has some sort of a repertoire. Even a total beginner will have certain tendencies in how they open a game, whether they know any theory or not.
I agree with ThrillerFan, stick with sound openings that are commonly played by strong players, rather than trappy gimmicks that are good for a cheap win over weak competition. You want something you can learn and stick with, because playing hundreds of games with it is how you learn it deeply and as Bishop_g5 said, knowing the openings you play better than your opponents gives you an edge.
As far as what to pick, most coaches recommend 1.e4 (or maybe 1.d4) as White. As Black, you need an opening against 1.e4 and 1.d4. Try a few out and see which ones makes sense to you. You want openings you can easily understand and that you are comfortable playing. That's more important than playing whatever cutting edge theorietical line Magnus Carlsen plays or whomever your chess hero happens to be. Understanding is always better than rote memorization.
"... For players with very limited experience, I recommend using openings in which the play can be clarified at an early stage, often with a degree of simplification. ... teachers all over the world suggest that inexperienced players begin with 1 e4. ..." - IM John Watson in a section of his 2010 book, Mastering the Chess Openings Vol. 4
He went on to suggest possibilities for how inexperienced players might react to the Sicilian, French, etc., as well as possibilities for how inexperienced players might react as Black to 1 e4 and 1 d4. Pete Tamburro wrote his 2014 book, Openings for Amateurs, in a similar sort of spirit, saying that it was for "club players." ("... the outside boundaries for the group will be defined here as between 1100 and 1900, or people who want to be there.") http://kenilworthian.blogspot.com/2014/05/review-of-pete-tamburros-openings-for.html
Do you find opening repertoires helpful? What are your thoughts on the practice of developing one? At what rating might making a repertoire be useful?
I got to USCF A class without one.
I suspect that, from one player to another, there is a lot of variation in ability to pick up information just by playing.
I bought a three book series on D4 repertoire for white. It's a great course with solid lines, but after a short while, I just don't have the patience for that kind of studying. I'm 63 and will probably never even hit B level, for obvious reasons, lol. But if your serious about improving, the courses themselves seem very well written, and worthwhile. The series I have is titled `A Practical White Repertoire` by Alexi Kornev.
I think that those books are intended to present one of the more ambitious repertoires out there. I think that GalaxKing might find Pete Tamburro's book (see above) more digestible. Perhaps one or more of his suggestions will be agreeable. In a 2010 book, GM Andrew Soltis wrote, "... good books can [give a clear verbal description of what an opening is all about] ... If there isn't any text - if it's all just moves - then this isn't the book for you."
Soltis also took up the topic of finding games to study: "[annotated games are] infinitely more useful than bare game scores. However, annotated games vary widely in quality. Some are excellent study material. Others are poor. But the most numerous fall into a third category - good-but-wrong-for-you. ... You want games with annotations that answer the questions that baffle you the most. ..." I think that that sort of idea applies to a lot more than just choosing games to study.
I think you should have one.
its kind of funny. I totally know what I'm going to do if I'm white and facing e4.
but against 1d4. ?. I've seen many things and none of them has really stuck.
at my level though. I don't think its that big of a deal.
bTW- reportoire books when an author lays out what to do if someone plays this and what to do if he plays that. They are awful. no one sticks to theory in any of my games- even when they can refer to them (online).
that kind of stuff is WAY above my head.
thegreat_patzer wrote:
"... at my level though. I don't think its that big of a deal.
... no one sticks to theory in any of my games- even when they can refer to them (online). ..."
i think the amount of required theory increases as one progresses to higher levels, but it makes sense for one's current efforts to focus on one's current needs. In the June 2015 issue of Chess, GM David Norwood was quoted: "A crap opening that you understand is always much better than a good one that you don't."
It just simplifies your play if you're an active tournament participant. You can't be ready for everything, so try to limit your opponents' options.
"... a commonly suggested 'easy' repertoire for White with 1 Nf3 and the King's indian Attack ... doesn't lead to an open game or one with a clear plan for White. Furthermore, it encourages mechanical play. Similarly, teachers sometimes recommend the Colle System ..., which can also be played too automatically, and usually doesn't lead to an open position. For true beginners, the King's Indian Attack and Colle System have the benefit of offering a safe position that nearly guarantees passage to some kind of playable middlegame; they may be a reasonable alternative if other openings are too intimidating. But having even a small amount of experience, you really should switch to more open and less automatic play." - IM John Watson in a section of his 2010 book, Mastering the Chess Openings Vol. 4
Do you find opening repertoires helpful? What are your thoughts on the practice of developing one? At what rating might making a repertoire be useful?