That is exactly the reason why you shouldn't memorize lines on lower levels. To really memorize lines you need to be strong enough to understand the idea behind certain moves. You can't really do that at lower levels.
It is completely fine to look for your mistakes and analyze, and even look at opening explorers. Just don't try to memorize some line that is 10 moves deep, it will not do you any good. On top of that, even if you manage to memorize, your opponents (as you've noticed) will play weird moves, certainly not main lines.
Solution? Learn opening principles and stick by them. Choose a variation, no more than 3-5 moves deep and play it.
Here is (more or less) all you need to know about openings as an improving player:
https://www.chess.com/blog/nklristic/surviving-the-opening-first-steps-to-chess-improvement
Anyway, good luck on your chess improvement.
How to Practice Openings When Opponents Rarely Play Them?
Thanks, that makes sense. And it's kind of how I've been playing and learning. But I feel like I'm starting to max out on what I can learn by just playing. At what point do you take the next step of studying and learning openings and how do you practice them to solidify them in your memory?
You should study chess right now. But openings are most likely the least important (memorizing concrete variations that is). At my level, I still didn't try to memorize anything actively - by sitting down and so on. I watch some youtube videos in variations I play, I check the database and I analyze with the engine along with it. I just started to make some pgn files and make some rough repertoire, but it mostly will not be more than 5-10 moves deep. Only some forcing lines might be. And I am aware of the fact that it is still not necessary for me to do this at this moment. I would probably progress faster if I base my studying on tactics and strategy (and endgames). But... I just want to do it. 
I have a feeling where the pieces should go but most of the time I do not know the exact move order. I still mainly follow opening principles, sometimes I know when it is ok to break the rules.
I play for a year, after learning the game as a child. Here is what I did to improve:
https://www.chess.com/blog/nklristic/the-beginners-tale-first-steps-to-chess-improvement
Hopefully, you'll find it useful. I am still pretty weak, but that is understandable. Improvement takes a lot of time. So just study when you have the time, and play these longer games. Eventually you will get better. If you need something else, feel free to ask.
Interesting. I'm kind of in the same place. That blog post is a great resource. I've been watching a lot of Gotham Chess on YouTube and I've learned a lot from him, but I still feel like I need to practice specific openings over and over to learn the pitfalls and not just keep repeating them. Some openings come up so rarely that as soon as my opponent plays them it really slows me down trying to remember what the right moves are and what blunders to avoid. I feel like I keep making them over and over and if I could just practice one opening over and over for a week I could get better at learning the specifics of which moves make sense at which point and why. Simply studying the theory doesn't work to solidify it in my memory, I need to practice it, but they come up so rarely in games I always forget what I've tried to learn.
It would be amazing if there was an engine you could play against that you could ask to play specific openings and randomly vary between the different lines and various moves that are possible in each position. I think that would really help to solidify the various possibilities in my mind.
I imagine this is what it is like training with other people. It would be awesome if we could do it with an engine.
It is fine not to know the theoretical move in the opening you have just encountered for the first time. That is normal, and it is part of the learning process. That is where opening principles come into picture. For instance you know that in most cases you shouldn't play Nh3 (there are always exceptions) so if you know the principles, then you will make a good if not the best move in 90% of the opening phase just by following those rules.
And practicing with the engine will not help you, it is pretty much the same as memorizing from the database with an engine. And as you have noticed, even if there was a thing like that your opponents will not play those moves.
Let's say you practice something like this:
In this example, it was much more important to learn that pattern - that you can't take the pawn because the knight will trap your queen. By the way, most likely nobody will memorize this much. I never got to that part in live game in a year. Do you know what will happen in practice?
Anyway, use those youtube recommendations I've given you. Gotham is fine, but there are more educational channels out there (he is a mix of educational content and entertainment).
If you prefer books, find some that are good for your rating. It will not do you any good if the book is intended for someone 2 200+ FIDE.
OP, I’m at about the same level as you (currently 900-ish) and here’s what I’ve been doing. As white, I generally play the London System, which is characterized by 1. d4 followed by setting up a reasonably standard position. I find what my opponent does may require I shuffle the move order a bit, but it’s very hard for black to prevent white from getting into that standard position (or close) and there are attacking opportunities that go from there that vary depending on what black has done. (For the London, black can’t exactly play the Pirc but ... d6 prevents occupying the common Nf3 -> Ne5 outpost. It’s still kind of a weak answer and I feel like I’d just go push pawns somewhere.)
Memorization for that comes down to knowing a few basic aggressive things black can do and slightly adjusting move order or making a small change to respond.
As black, against anything but e4 I play the King’s Indian Defense, which, like the London, is hard to punish and comes with a couple basic attacks to follow up.
Finally, against e4 I play the Qd8 variation of the Scandinavian. For this, my opponents usually have no clue what to do on move 2, so rather than memorize the main line, I have an idea of what position I’m trying to achieve, but also I’ve memorized the best single-move responses to all the common reactions that are not the main line’s 2. exd5. Then, I rely on basic opening guidelines to carry me from there.
You’d think that a theory-heavy opening like the Scandinavian would be my weakest, but it turns out that by far my best win rates are games I play as black that start 1. e4 d5 and my opponent has no clue what to do next. Just knowing that one best next move for common scenarios and using general opening rules past that often leaves me shredding my opponent.
That is exactly the reason why you shouldn't memorize lines on lower levels. To really memorize lines you need to be strong enough to understand the idea behind certain moves. You can't really do that at lower levels.
It is completely fine to look for your mistakes and analyze, and even look at opening explorers. Just don't try to memorize some line that is 10 moves deep, it will not do you any good. On top of that, even if you manage to memorize, your opponents (as you've noticed) will play weird moves, certainly not main lines.
Solution? Learn opening principles and stick by them. Choose a variation, no more than 3-5 moves deep and play it.
Thank you for this post! I've seen a lot of recommendations about "opening principles" and I couldn't get what it means. Well, I've been lazy to look it up. I now have a good grasp of what you are saying here. Those games you uploaded are very helpful to understand because of the comments you added.
I've noticed a lot of people playing the Scandinavian up to three moves, at which point I lose track.
As others have said, you dont need to learn openings to any great degree. Understand and play Opening Principles. There are many good websites that will explain what this means. Also I recommend Chessable (google it) which has a free course called Smithys Opening Fundamentals which is a good introduction to Opening Principles. A book I have is Discovering Chess Openings by John Emms which is all about opening principles not concrete lines. Most beginners lose games because they hang material. To get past 1400 for example you must never or rarely hang an undefended piece. Opening prep will not help with this. I'm 1540 in Daily and only know the first few moves of the main lines of 3 or 4 openings. You can open competently simply by making sensible developing moves and asking yourself questions about your opponents intentions and looking at how they are controlling the centre and where the pressure and weaknesses are. If you still want to memorize lines then Chessables spaced repetition can help.
Just to add, if you have time to regularly study, you need to be working on tactical puzzles and working those patterns into your brain. I've just played a couple of games against an 1100 player. He lost both, in one he lost his queen to a simple knight fork, in the other he didnt see that his pawn was pinned so couldn't defend checkmate. Both were simple tactics. To progress, these are the things to spend time learning.
OP, I’m at about the same level as you (currently 900-ish) and here’s what I’ve been doing. As white, I generally play the London System, which is characterized by 1. d4 followed by setting up a reasonably standard position. I find what my opponent does may require I shuffle the move order a bit, but it’s very hard for black to prevent white from getting into that standard position (or close) and there are attacking opportunities that go from there that vary depending on what black has done. (For the London, black can’t exactly play the Pirc but ... d6 prevents occupying the common Nf3 -> Ne5 outpost. It’s still kind of a weak answer and I feel like I’d just go push pawns somewhere.)
Memorization for that comes down to knowing a few basic aggressive things black can do and slightly adjusting move order or making a small change to respond.
As black, against anything but e4 I play the King’s Indian Defense, which, like the London, is hard to punish and comes with a couple basic attacks to follow up.
Finally, against e4 I play the Qd8 variation of the Scandinavian. For this, my opponents usually have no clue what to do on move 2, so rather than memorize the main line, I have an idea of what position I’m trying to achieve, but also I’ve memorized the best single-move responses to all the common reactions that are not the main line’s 2. exd5. Then, I rely on basic opening guidelines to carry me from there.
You’d think that a theory-heavy opening like the Scandinavian would be my weakest, but it turns out that by far my best win rates are games I play as black that start 1. e4 d5 and my opponent has no clue what to do next. Just knowing that one best next move for common scenarios and using general opening rules past that often leaves me shredding my opponent.
London System is fine, but it is not that great for an improving player. Why? You already pointed out the reason. You will play the same 5-10 moves every time you have the white pieces. For instance if you play d4 but go for 2. c4 or if you play 1. e4, black will throw different stuff at you,you will see a lot of different positions because you 'll have to adjust your moves.
In London system you play the same setup every time in half of your games. Not that great if you want to learn chess. A fresh mind should expose itself to different ideas. So what if you lose some games because of it? That is part of the learning experience as well and you' ll lose some games with London as well.
In London system you play the same setup every time in half of your games. Not that great if you want to learn chess. A fresh mind should expose itself to different ideas. So what if you lose some games because of it? That is part of the learning experience as well and you' ll lose some games with London as well.
You're right that the London System yields the same positions quite a bit. And, to be honest, I'm not that excited playing as white right now because of the regularity of it. However, the challenge with the London for me is having a coherent plan for how to turn a known, solid, but relatively passive position into attacks that keep me in control of the game and are consistent with what black is doing.
Also, at least for now, I'm focused on learning and applying basic tactical patterns and not blundering, which are relevant issues no matter what I do. It's a reasonable argument that the familiarity of London positions after 100+ games is a little bit of a crutch, but only really for the first half of the game.
My personal biggest issue with the London System is that it doesn't necessarily play to my current strengths. The reason I have a good win rate when my opponent goes out of book on move 2 with the Scandinavian is that we quickly stray into "wtf is this?" territory with our positions, and that's where my time spent on tactical study helps get me an edge over my opponents. A shocking number of those games essentially end because, faced with unfamiliar positions, my opponent blunders a rook or queen. That's a lot less common playing the London. (I sometimes do too, but I play on, because I often find that my overconfident opponent does the same later, and things even up.)
To me, the King's Indian Defense, when I play it, feels like it's somewhere in the middle. I play it against a variety of attacks, but since it's so passive, it requires taking the initiative early, so it can lead to chaos relatively fast, but unlike the Scandinavian, it doesn't seem to provoke actively unwise play from my opponents.
Anyway, I appreciate your thoughts and understand where you're coming from. Certainly something to think about when I'm feeling stuck later on. For now, though, I feel like I still have plenty to work on improving in my games, so I'll probably wait a bit to change up my opening situation. (Plus I'm still smarting from seeing my rating tank 100 points the last time I did that, maybe a month ago.)
I understand you, but the problem is if you decide to stop playing London system one day, and you'll probably want to do that, it will be tough. For instance you can get to 1 800 just by playing the London but you'll then want to play other stuff and your game will suffer a lot. As for KID, that is different because you can't play it against 1.e4, and you can't play the same moves every time like the London. So playing KID is certainly fine. You can play Pirc or Modern against e4, that is true, but as far as I know (I haven't played any of those) those are not really the same thing.
But of course, it is ultimately your choice.
I understand you, but the problem is if you decide to stop playing London system one day, and you'll probably want to do that, it will be tough. For instance you can get to 1 800 just by playing the London but you'll then want to play other stuff and your game will suffer a lot.
Fair enough. I think it's a given that I will want to try a different opening as white LONG before I get to 1800. I'm already kind of clawing my eyes out with boredom.
If you sign up for the hourly 30min rapid tournaments it's an easy way to get paired with 1100-1200 players if you are at the 800 rating level.
Learn ideas and themes and try to understand the positions more. Study your games differently, they won't follow specific lines but there will be tons of ideas that you need to know to develop well and prevent the enemy from doing so.
Hi, when you start playing there is no need to memorize lot of openings, few basic openings and how to put basic development principles into them. If you go study openings that are not common at begginers lever you will lose lot of time and effort and will hardly benefit from it.
Best regards Ivan
Everybody above who's been saying don't learn openings, rather learn opening principles is correct.
But, still, I do understand the urge to play a particular opening just because you want to. So, just wanted to drop in and say that you can play against a bot with a pre-set position. You can, e.g., set up at move 2 or 3 or 4 of the Pirc, and play it from there. (I've been trying to learn Nimzo, and nobody has played even the first two moves for it against me -- so I tried a few against a bot)
Nevertheless, to repeat what others have said: if you have a firm grasp of principles, then when you face a strange opening, you usually end up playing a decent response. (I recently faced a King's Indian Attack -- which I had never seen before -- and apparently I played "correctly" for the first six moves! I just fell back on "principles".)
I've recently gotten back into chess and have been really trying to work on my game by playing here on Chess.com and analyzing my games afterward. One thing I'm recognizing is that I really struggle against certain openings like the Pirc Defense. I can study the opening in the Analyzer, but I so rarely get it against opponents in the 800 range that I usually forget everything I studied by the time it comes around.
Is there anyway to practice openings against an engine where you can ask it to play one specific defense and randomly vary between the different lines every time? I feel like I need to play some of these openings over and over again to be able to remember them otherwise I just forget what I've studied before I get a chance to play it again.
How do you guys deal with studying these lines that don't come up frequently enough to solidify them in your working memory?