No Openings for Beginners

I am constantly told not to play an opening as a beginner. I have seen some places not to try to learn a specific opening until around 1200 rating.

Most sources say to play developing moves and get the pieces out as a beginner, not bring the queen out to early, etc.

I know how to make developing moves and general opening principles, but I often struggle in the opening. I constantly face different things from opponents, (which is why I’ve been told not to worry about openings since at my level no one plays the “correct” moves) but when my pieces are in different positions every game I play I struggle to make it out of the opening with a solid position.

My best chance of still having a good position usually comes with trading all the pieces until there are a few left on the board.

How do I make it out of the opening phase with a good position if I never play specific opening setups? Every game ends up in a new position to learn that I am not familiar with.

Any advice is appreciated.

Are you struggling with the white or black pieces or both?

For me, I am clueless with the white pieces and just wing it for tactics.

As black I counter attack well and get as far with 1900 players OTB. It may not be an opening issue until somebody analyzes your last handful of games.

Somebody?

What do you with a ‘solid position’?

If we take this game you played, you did just fine in the opening https://www.chess.com/game/live/63570001927?username=castle_fast not perfect moves but good enough to get a comfortable middle game.

I bet you did not know you were playing Alekhine's Defense: Scandinavian variation. You didn't need to know. You just needed to see what was attacking what and do some basic calculation to check that your moves are not blunders.

That's all you need for now. As you start facing higher rated players openings will become more important, but you don't need to worry yet.

As you play more games you will come across a lot of different openings because your opponents will be playing them. That is all good experience for you and over time the best moves will come naturally.

You are always going to play some opening but you don't necessarily need to know the "best moves" or theory. You just need a simple plan. I personally like the French for that reason as you have a very clear plan from the opening

Daniel Naroditsky will tell you you must have at least some basic opening knowledge to progress, and I agree. Doesn't mean you need to study openings 24/7, but you need to at least know something about what you're playing and have some basic ideas. 

In that opinion he disagrees with many coaches and strong players... But I still agree with him. 

When Danya said that, was it an advice for 1600-rated players or for 600-rated players? I would guess the former. 

@1

"not to play an opening as a beginner"
++ You are rated 764. That means you will never win or lose because of the opening but because of tactical blunders by you or your opponent. Apply blunder checking.

"not to try to learn a specific opening"
++ Do not learn openings, play openings and analyse your lost games. That what you study will not happen and when it finally happens you will have forgotten. Experience from your own games will stick better in your memory and is more likely to repeat in your subsequent games.

"play developing moves and get the pieces out as a beginner, not bring the queen out to early"
++ Yes, all true. Most important is king safety and the center.

"I often struggle in the opening." ++ How? In what way?

"I constantly face different things from opponents"
++ That is normal. You accumulate experience.

"at my level no one plays the correct moves" ++ That is right.

"I struggle to make it out of the opening with a solid position"
++ Apply the opening principles. Think during the opening phase. Do not rush.

"trading all the pieces until there are a few left on the board"
++ That is a good strategy, especially if you have solid endgame knowledge.

"How do I make it out of the opening phase with a good position" ++ Opening principles.

"Every game ends up in a new position to learn that I am not familiar with."
++ That is the core of chess. Sooner or later in a game you always end up with a position you are not familiar with. You have to think. You have to decide on a good move by logical thinking.

No, it was for beginners.  And, it was a video lesson that's on YT with one of his students then rated <1000.  Might have been 800s, I can't recall. But he talks at some length about it, and follow  up videos show the results of his 15 minutes of "theory" instruction.  

I play openings for achievements

I think the facts behind opinions on opening study have changed in the past few years, and here is a good video emphasizing that point. 

 

Chess Openings Resources for Beginners and Beyond...

https://www.chess.com/blog/RussBell/openings-resources-for-beginners-and-beyond

https://www.chess.com/blog/RussBell

Well, people saying not to learn openings at the start, but opening principles are mostly correct. However, there is a difference between some real understanding and just memorizing stuff.
I will give you some examples.

Ok, so the first example showed you that this is a waste of time. So what to do instead?

This is a completely different stuff compared to the first example. This is a position you might get from time to time. But you still shouldn't try to memorize it like a poem. You should try to understand it the way I explained it here. This is only one example of course.

So what to do? You play a game. You check the opening explorer afterwards. See how many book moves you and the opponent played. If someone deviated, try to see if the deviation is terrible or slightly bad, or completely fine. If it is fine, great, but if it is bad, try to understand why. 

So, do not try to memorize some 10, or 15 moves line. That is a pain and a waste of time. Pick a 3 or 5 move variation you want to go for in your games. and just go from there. Checking the explorer is fine, and it can be a part of the post game analysis, but that is it for the openings. 

That way you will gradually understand more and more of the openings you play.

I glanced at some of your recent games, and I agree with your instincts: it might be time for you to start developing a repertoire.

You already clearly have a basic grasp of opening principles. And you seem to prefer 1.e4 as white.

As black, though, you seem to have no real established repertoire.

When I started taking lessons with a National Master, many years ago, the first thing we did is sit down and figure out a 3-opening repertoire for me to focus on.

1 white opening

1 black defense against e4

1 black defense against d4

This was done because these would be the three most common openings/defenses that I would be playing, throughout the majority of my games.

This doesn't mean you have to start diving headlong into "theory" ... but it can be nice to have an idea of what e4 defense, or what d4 defense, you'd like to play at the board ...

So, long story short: it's probably time for you to start dipping your toes into opening waters. Maybe you'd like the French Defense? Or the Caro-Kann?

Maybe you'd like the King's Indian Defense, or the Queen's Gambit Declined?

Once you start down this path, the learning curve can steepen. Though you can also start to develop understanding, and a sense of "direction", once you know the actual names of the openings you'd like to play ...

Thanks for the advice.

I have tried some of the setup based openings recently like the London system or King’s Indian Defense. The main criticism I hear of setup based openings is that they make you think less since you play the same moves each time and I would have to agree. That being said, it is nice to be able to reliably enter the middle game with a solid position.

As IronSteam1 correctly assumed, I have had more fun recently in games where I started with e4 instead of d4 and the London system.

Something to add is that at the 700-800 level opening principles are often ignored. One thing I noticed after reviewing some games is that I often lose because I spend time trying to develop my pieces to a good square while my opponent ignores the “normal” opening principles and launches an early attack.

In games like that I either lose a large amount of material and get checkmated or win because I was able to defend my position and use the weaknesses my opponent created to attack.

The six year old that beat me OTB (yes, I'm that pathetic) a few weeks ago played the Petrov. So I would recommend that one because that's what the kid's coach trained him to play as black. On the Queen's side I would suggest the Slav as black. Both of these openings have reputations for being dull but you have to start somewhere. Your Petrov will stand the test of time and your Slav will help you with the Queen's Gambit and can become a mean Semi-Slav a few years down the road. I'll leave it to someone else to recommend an e4 offensive opening. Preferably something that would preclude a Sicilian. Unless you like the Sicilian of course. Maybe learn the closed Sicilian along with something else.

On that topic, If I was to try to start on an opening or two does anyone have any e4 opening suggestions?

There have already been lots of opening suggestions for the black pieces that I will look into.

The Vienna or the Scotch maybe. You might surprise some people with those. Don't study any opening too hard. You won't be able to grasp the theory to master any of them. They're just a sandbox to play in. It's better to start with endgames and tactics. None of the openings I have suggested are great openings. You can't start with a great opening. That comes much later.

Are opening in chess are important thing?