What opening is best?

I don't know many openings (actually I don't know any at all) but is there any opening that you guys think is better than the others?

Just study some general opening moves and you'll be fine for now. Most players even in the 1500 pool don't really know their openings.

Most players in the 2100 range don't know their openings.

"There is no such thing as a 'best opening.' Each player should choose an opening that attracts him. Some players are looking for a gambit as White, others for Black gambits. Many players that are starting out (or have bad memories) want to avoid mainstream systems, others want dynamic openings, and others want calm positional pathways. It’s all about personal taste and personal need.
For example, if you feel you’re poor at tactics you can choose a quiet positional opening (trying to hide from your weakness and just play chess), or seek more dynamic openings that engender lots of tactics and sacrifices (this might lead to more losses but, over time, will improve your tactical skills and make you stronger)." - IM Jeremy Silman (January 28, 2016)
https://www.chess.com/article/view/opening-questions-and-a-dream-mate

Perhaps it would be a good idea to start with Discovering Chess Openings, a book about opening principles.
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627114655/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen91.pdf

Here are some books that set out to help the reader to choose specific openings:

Openings for Amateurs by Pete Tamburro (2014)
http://kenilworthian.blogspot.com/2014/05/review-of-pete-tamburros-openings-for.html
https://chessbookreviews.wordpress.com/tag/openings-for-amateurs/

https://www.chess.com/blog/ForwardChess/book-of-the-week-openings-for-amateurs
https://www.mongoosepress.com/catalog/excerpts/openings_amateurs.pdf

First Steps: 1 e4 e5
https://www.newinchess.com/media/wysiwyg/product_pdf/7790.pdf

https://chesscafe.com/book-reviews/first-steps-1-e4-e5-by-john-emms/

First Steps: Queen's Gambit

https://www.newinchess.com/media/wysiwyg/product_pdf/7652.pdf

My First Chess Opening Repertoire for White
https://www.newinchess.com/media/wysiwyg/product_pdf/9033.pdf
https://chessbookreviews.wordpress.com/tag/vincent-moret/
Opening Repertoire 1 e4
https://www.newinchess.com/media/wysiwyg/product_pdf/7819.pdf

Yasser Seirawan's Winning Chess Openings
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627132508/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen173.pdf

Be sure to try to use the openings in games in between sessions of learning. Most of the time, one faces a position with no knowledge of a specific move indicated in a book. One has to accept that as part of chess, and think of opening knowledge as a sometimes helpful aid. After a game, it makes sense to try to look up the moves in a book and see if it has some indication of how one might have played better in the opening. Many opening books are part explanation and part reference material. The reference material is included in the text with the idea that one mostly skips it on a first reading, and looks at an individual item when it applies to a game that one has just played. Resist the temptation to try to turn a book into a mass memorization project. There are many important subjects that one should not neglect because of too much time on opening study.
https://www.chess.com/article/view/learning-an-opening-to-memorize-or-understand
"... Overall, I would advise most players to stick to a fairly limited range of openings, and not to worry about learning too much by heart. ..." - FM Steve Giddins (2008)
"... I feel that the main reasons to buy an opening book are to give a good overview of the opening, and to explain general plans and ideas. ..." - GM John Nunn (2006)
"... If the book contains illustrative games, it is worth playing these over first ..." - GM John Nunn (2006)
"... the average player only needs to know a limited amount about the openings he plays. Providing he understands the main aims of the opening, a few typical plans and a handful of basic variations, that is enough. ..." - FM Steve Giddins (2008)
"... Everyman Chess has started a new series aimed at those who want to understand the basics of an opening, i.e., the not-yet-so-strong players. ... I imagine [there] will be a long series based on the premise of bringing the basic ideas of an opening to the reader through plenty of introductory text, game annotations, hints, plans and much more. ..." - FM Carsten Hansen (2002)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627055734/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen38.pdf
"The way I suggest you study this book is to play through the main games once, relatively quickly, and then start playing the variation in actual games. Playing an opening in real games is of vital importance - without this kind of live practice it is impossible to get a 'feel' for the kind of game it leads to. There is time enough later for involvement with the details, after playing your games it is good to look up the line." - GM Nigel Davies (2005)
"... Review each of your games, identifying opening (and other) mistakes with the goal of not repeatedly making the same mistake. ... It is especially critical not to continually fall into opening traps – or even lines that result in difficult positions ..." - NM Dan Heisman (2007)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627062646/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman81.pdf

 (LOL) now that's news to me. The only opening book study I did was the Sicilian.

Pelican: Sozin attack, Richter Rauzer attract, and a few others.

I also dabbled with the accelerated Dragon a bit, but I need a refresher course.

Merry Christmas 🎅

Back in July, there was some discussion of whether or not understanding of an opening is a yes-or-no thing or a matter of degree.

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/openings-against-e4-that-are-open-except-e5?page=3

Here is some of it:

"Is understanding [an opening] a yes-or-no thing or a matter of degree? ..." - kindaspongey (July 17, 2019)

"It really is a yes or no thing. You know it or you don't. There are not varying degrees. ..." - ThrillerFan (July 17, 2019)

"... I understand the French as well as any GM the plays the French does, but understanding and execution are not the same thing. ..." - ThrillerFan (July 17, 2019)

"I have played it for 20+ years, but probably only truly understood it for maybe the last 5 to 10. ... 10 years of doing it wrong and then another couple of years to fix the problem. …" - ThrillerFan (July 18, 2019)

"... So what was the state of things after just one year of fixing? Would you say that your understanding was the same as that of any GM who played the French? Would you say that your understanding was the same as that of a beginner? ..." - kindaspongey (July 18, 2019)

"… It is possible to fully understand a variation without fully understanding the entire opening. ..." - ThrillerFan (July 19, 2019)

"In that case, would one say that the opening-understanding is that of a beginner?" - kindaspongey (July 20, 2019)

"… As Black, you need a full understanding of the defense of your choice. You cannot half-a$$ it. ..." - ThrillerFan (July 20, 2019)

"[Does 'half-a$$' refer] to something that would be between GM-understanding and beginner-understanding?" - kindaspongey (July 20, 2019)

"... Take a 1000 piece jigsaw puzzle or Lego set. What do you have when 500 pieces are put together? You have an incomplete product! Are you going to glue the 500 jigsaw pieces together and hang it up on the wall with 500 pieces missing? Again, you know it or you don't. There is no half-a$$ing it. ..." - ThrillerFan (July 20, 2019)

"A jigsaw puzzle can be partially finished. Instead of claiming the non-existence of 'half-a$$ing', are you now expressing disapproval of it? For many, GM-level understanding is a long way off (if it is ever likely to come at all). Using an opening with gradually improving understanding seems to me to be generally recognized as appropriate behavior. Perhaps the sort of thing that you yourself did with the French for a couple years? ..." - kindaspongey (July 20, 2019)

"... How much is a Mona Lisa painting worth? $2000? (Hypothetically). If I paint you half a Mona Lisa, you giving me $1000 for that? ..." - ThrillerFan (July 20, 2019)

"Are you trying to indicate that a player can't benefit from less-than-GM understanding of an opening? Did you benefit from your first year of work on French-fixing?" - kindaspongey (July 20, 2019)

There is no "best" opening.  Its personal preference.

Play slow time controls.

DO NOT study openings.  Study opening principles.

Find openings you like to play.  Gain an understanding of the piece placement, and pawn structures.  "Why" do the pieces, and pawns move to the squares they do?

To get good at chess, you need to turn into a 3 year old, and ask "why" all the time.

1.a3

I don't know what is best opening. Most Exciting... SemiSlav Botvinik.

"... It is difficult to apply the right principle in the heat of battle, especially when it conflicts with another principle. When is a violation of principle acceptable and when is it not? We acquire positional judgment by studying master games. …" - GM Larry Evans (1974)

Many 21st century opening books are largely collections of games, explained for the near-beginner.
"... I feel that the main reasons to buy an opening book are to give a good overview of the opening, and to explain general plans and ideas. ..." - GM John Nunn (2006)

Best is 1. d4 Nf6 2.d5! and Black is busted. 

No one has ever tried it, therefore people are unaware this is best. 

White has gained space, what does black has as a counterweight? 

Similarly, on 1. Nf3 d5 2.c4, 2...d4! gives black large advantage.

Almost all hypermodern theories are wrong, so better stick with the classics and some latest

developments.

Have written several blogs extolling the virtues of the London System.

https://www.chess.com/blog/2Bf41-0/3-reasons-why-everyone-should-play-london-system-pawn-structures Are the important of pawn structures.

https://www.chess.com/blog/2Bf41-0/london-system-q-a Is about frequent queries regarding the London System, and chess improvement.

https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1983531

https://www.chess.com/article/view/the-perfect-opening-for-the-lazy-student

https://www.chess.com/article/view/how-to-understand-openings

Around 2010, IM John Watson wrote, "... For players with very limited experience, ... the Sicilian Defence ... normally leaves you with little room to manoeuvre and is best left until your positional skills develop. ... I'm still not excited about my students playing the Sicilian Defence at [the stage where they have a moderate level of experience and some opening competence], because it almost always means playing with less space and development, and in some cases with exotic and not particularly instructive pawn-structures. ... if you're taking the Sicilian up at [say, 1700 Elo and above], you should put in a lot of serious study time, as well as commit to playing it for a few years. ..."

"... [The Botvinnik variation of the Semi-Slav] is known for the amazing complications that occur from very double-edged play. … The best prepared and the most tactically aware tend to shine. …" - GM Glenn Flear (2005)

At this stage, here are two useful ideas....First, remember the three points to an opening: 1, king to safety, 2. control the center and 3. develop pieces.

Second, look for just one opening and play it continually if you feel comfortable with it. Don't make things too complicated for now.

"... 1 g4  White weakens the kingside for no real compensation; it cannot be recommended for anything other than blitz games. …" - FM Carsten Hansen (2010)

YGNR

What if the opening books that you hold in high acclaim only confuse beginners?  What if, in teaching opening principles, they failed to teach the student how to come up with raw ideas in a given position?  I know someone who studies openings like you preach that people should do, but I think he actually got worse.  He never achieves the game that he studied about.  All I see him play is bad openings.  That's coming from a guy who studied opening books.

No opening book can teach the student openings.  Why, mainly because, most of the openings he is learning in the book, he will never use, and if he is not memorizing his openings, then he isn't going to remember the right line when the game comes.  You said yourself that you said your opening books where not meant to be made into a giant memorization choir, so, how do you expect them to play their openings, if they don't memorize them?  That is the fifty dollar question.  Sure they could probably remember general ideas, but when they are actually playing the opening, if they didn't memorize it, they will forget an idea or move order and mess the whole thing up.  I've seen beginners do this all the time.  Personally, I think it's better to study master games from trusted sources, not from opening manuals, that cater to know certain openings.  What if the opening being played isn't anything he studied?  That's the problem too.

Are you a master Kingspongy?  Because I know a master, and he tells me, not to study openings as a beginner.  Just focus on tactics endgames, and studying master games, and also take time out to study middle game concepts.  He likes Pawn structure chess, which he said is the best middle gamebook ever written.  You not being a master Kingspondgy, wouldn't you think he knows something about chess that you actually don't???  Is this possible?  I'm not trying to be mean.  Just saying, that masters disagree with your choice of opening book material.  It seems to me that that list is a big list of a lot of unnecessary reading.  We all can agree to disagree, but I'm telling you most of the chess world says to stay away from the opening study as a beginner.  Don't you think there is some truth to that?  I'm not saying don't ever study openings.  I'm just saying, don't buy 10 books on just openings.  That's what I am saying.