Some openings are out of date because for some reason they have been refuted since their inception, usually by computers. Despite that, I don't necesarily think they can't still be of use to the amateur player, the ideas are good in most of them.
Either that or they are made of yoghurt. 
Either that or they are made of yoghurt.
The Ware Opening comes to mind.
I think saying an opening book is out of date doesn't really mean the respective opening has been refuted. Opening monographs (or repertoire books like the one mentioned above) don't stop at explaining some crucial ideas of the openings in question, but usually give some concrete recommendations as to which line to play.
Now these lines are constantly played and tested in practice, so it doesn't come as a surprise that new ideas are found, techniques honed and variations reevaluated. Obviously a book which is some years old is prone to have some holes in the recommended variations, and that's what I'd call out of date then.
I have Action Chess. He recommends as Black playing what he calls "The All Purpose Defense" which is basically a QGD Tartakower defensive setup. Against 1.e4 he recommends the French Rubinstein Variation and Sicilian Dragon Variation. As White he recommends the Colle System. He shows how to play these against most all reasonable possibilities.
The Tartakower setup is quite playable (I’ve been using it for years) and the French Rubinstein is very solid if a bit passive. His analysis of the Dragon is outdated though and probably not to be recommended. The Colle System is quite sound and easily learned even if it offers limited chances at the upper levels.
As Purdy points out his recommendations are designed to get you to a playable middlegame without getting blown off the board or falling into traps and he does a creditable job of explaining the ideas behind these openings. Of course some specific lines will be outdated and will need refining but generally his recommendations are a good start if you want to learn some simple and basically solid openings.
Bottom line: I would not hesitate to purchase it unless you’re going to be playing a lot of experts and masters.
You might, just as I did, find that Action Chess lacks the flow of other Purdy books. Still you can get the titla for peanuts so I might suggest that you buy it anyway. The trick reading the book might be to ignore all the notes untill you really get to the bottom of the message of the book.
"Everything is playable below master strength" (sort of....)
I have Action Chess, too. As mentioned, it lacks the flow of Purdy's other books, mostly because Purdy didn't write it as a book. He wrote a bunch of articles that happened to be on the same or similar topics, and someone 40+ years later decided to put them together inside one book.
Personally, I went with his opening recommendations when I was fairly new to the game, and I found that it actually stifled my chess. I got stuck in the low 1400's USCF rating for over a year. I learned more when I dumped his "easy to play" recommendations and started playing sharper openings. I think his entire premise is flawed.
He thinks that the beginner should learn a few openings that aren't very sharp, so they can get out of the opening alive and play the middle game. He missed one very key point, though: Big mistakes are easier to learn from than little mistakes.
If you make a big mistake and get blown off the chessboard in 10 moves, you'll learn from it and never make that mistake again. Congratulations on becoming a better chess player. If you play a "safe" opening and "stay in the game" for 50+ moves against a strong player, you'll still lose because subtle positional maneuvering will give your opponent a better endgame. You may feel better about having lasted that long in the game, but chances are you won't even understand why you lost, so you won't learn anything from it. That was my problem.
Until you hit at least 1800 OTB rating, you should be sticking to openings that lead to sharp play, though possibly avoiding the ones that require the most memorization of specific theory. ie Stick to 1. e4 e5 from both sides, and play a variety of Italian, Scotch, Vienna, Spanish, etc openings, but generally avoid the gambit lines unless you really want to spend time on opening study.
As for the openings in this particular book, theory on the Sicilian Dragon evolves weekly, so articles this old are clearly VERY out of date. His explanation of the Colle system and QGD are pretty good, but I would expect that there are better modern books to learn that material if you're interested in those openings, and those will include some of the newer tries that opponents will use against you.
The only reason I'd say you should buy this book is if you're really interested in playing the Rubenstein French. He introduces a novel move very early in that variation which seems quite interesting, and I've never seen it mentioned anywhere else. He also does a pretty good job in his coverage of the French Exchange variation. Unfortunately, his coverage of the Advance variation is pretty skimpy, and that's the line that your opponents will go into the most often once you start playing the French, so you'll still need supplemental material to learn how to play against that.
I actually just pulled that book out again this week after about a year and a half of not playing the French, because I'm considering trying that Rubenstein line again now that I'm a somewhat stronger player. I'll still answer 1. e4 with e5, but I'm thinking of answering 1. d4 with e6 before f5 in playing the Dutch (usually 1. d4 f5) to avoid some anti-Dutch gambits, and I suspect some opponents will answer with 2. e4 to transpose into the French.
If that was the case why didn’t you learn something about positional chess and endgames so when you do play stronger players you would understand what’s happening…maybe even win occasionally?
Sounds like all you’ve done is get proficient at bashing 1400’s when they make tactical mistakes.
Why keep switching openings trying to find a way to avoid this, then avoid that then have to try something else? Why not stick with a few solid ones that you’ll still be playing years from now. You’ll be playing positions that are familiar because you’ve seen just about everything before.
I did learn some about positional play and endgames, but not enough. And I'd make tactical mistakes quite often. Again, big mistakes vs small mistakes.
All I'm saying is you can't play chess in fear of losing. Dive right into the hard stuff, instead of playing quiet openings that avoid the complications. You'll get bashed quite a few times at first, but you'll learn from it and come out a better player for it.
I really don't see how anyone can become really good at tactics by playing Purdy's recommended repertoire.
I second almost everything Fromper says. Playing the "classical" open games in order to learn the basic concepts of activity, dynamics and tactics is considered inevitable by most strong players. Constructing an opening repertoire trying to avoid these lines is likely to deprive you of some necessary experiences, even if these invlove some dire losses.
This is especially true if your opening repertoire contains some really boring lines like the Colle. There is a reason why the Colle is not popular at high level, and it is its lack of a variety of different strategical plans. I seriously doubt that by playing the Colle you can learn much more strategy than pushing e3-e4 at the right moment, let alone anything about the dynamics of the Open Games.
So, bottom line of this, I'd strongly recommend getting yourself another - possibly more modern - book. There are some good repertoire books on the market, and even you have to purchase one for White and another one for Black it will probably be worth both the invested money and time you need to work them through.
Thanks for your response to Purdy 's Action Chess. Unfortunately I ordered this book yesterday and now I am sorry I did.
stwils
It is Purdy after all! Don't feel bad!
Yeah, it's still a well written book. And if you're looking for an into to these specific openings (other than the Dragon, which just has too much critical theory to use an old book), it's still a good book to own. I just don't like the idea of playing these openings until you're already strong enough tactically to work on positional play without blundering.
I love Purdy. And I was thinking of buying his "Action Chess: Purdy's 24 hour repertoire" by Tykodi. (It is about the opening.)
But all the folks at Amazon (customer reviewers) say it is out of date. Meaning, I guess, that the openings are out of date.
Tell me. How do openings go out of date?
I have his Guide to Good Chess and there is a chapter in there on the opening. But no one says that is out of date. It is a wonderful book that I am studying.
Does anyone have Action Chess?
stwils