Teach an opening that makes me 1700 ELO

Well im only 700 ELO

We are not your subordinates, and no opening will do what you want.

If you want to become better at chess, learn chess. At 700, your best bet by far is to work on tactics, tactics, and tactics!

And after some time, read something on general chess strategy.

@nadjarostowa said in #2:

We are not your subordinates, and no opening will do what you want.

If you want to become better at chess, learn chess. At 700, your best bet by far is to work on tactics, tactics, and tactics!

And after some time, read something on general chess strategy.

I couldn't agree more

Opening principles is all you need until your a good but better than 50% of all players and tactics of course.

This study is on Opening principles, it's pretty good

You can study London or some gambits. It possibly will bring you to 1700, but learning will take a lot of time, and 1700 will be almost ceiling for you.

Lonelypeanut - I would never recommend your study for students,learning opening principles, because it is faulty.

@LarryWest said in #15 (at https://lichess.org/forum/general-chess-discussion/what-is-the-best-opening-for-intermediate-levels-like-me?page=2):

... I think it is really dishonest to tell beginner players to play this or that opening and they will just do better. ...
Many beginner books encourage attention to a variety of topics,
http://www.gambitbooks.com/pdfs/A_Complete_Chess_Course.pdf
but I do not remember any that indicate that much is to be expected from concentration on learning an opening.
One can encounter advice like this:
"... you must choose what openings you will be using. ..." - Journey to the Chess Kingdom, a book for beginners by Yuri Averbakh and Mikhail Beilin
However, there has also been this sort of warning:
"... By far, the most common question I'm asked is, 'What openings are best for me and how do I create a proper opening repertoire?' Of course, I warn them about the 'spending all your study time memorizing variations rather than learning how to play good chess' syndrome, but then I cave to their query and ..." - IM Jeremy Silman (2010)
and:
"... I am not a big fan of weaker players memorizing lots of opening lines they will never play. However, it is quite a different issue to spend a small amount of time learning how to play your openings a little better each time they occur. A long journey begins with a single step. ..." - NM Dan Heisman (2005)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627023809/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman50.pdf

@Sandy1966-05 said in #5:

You can study London or some gambits. It possibly brings you to 1700

No.

Chess games are not decided in the opening. There is a middle game, and often an endgame. If you're a 700 player, even knowing the first 15 moves by heart, this might make you 800, or 900 if you really manage to find a repertoire which gets you out of every early trouble. Which is highly unlikely.

It will probably take a year or two, and give only very little measurable improvement. If you invest only half the time on "real" chess improvement, you will gain a couple of hundred rating points easily.

But there is an important point: At this level, your opponents will not know the openings, either. No matter how many moves you learned, you will see new things very early on. You simply cannot prepare in depth for that. And don't think that 1700s know their openings too well...

Openings need a foundation of strategy, and strategy needs tactics.

I mean it isn't useless to learn some openings, but it won't get you the result you hope for - so you might only get frustrated.

Just look at the games you played. Sure, some will be decided in the opening (but this will be true even on 1700+), but most games will have plenty of mistakes and blunders from both sides.

Play against a computer program that is a little bit better than you, until you can beat it 3/4 times. Then play against a stronger program and repeat. Takes time but it works.

Dogsnob. Yeah, that is the way. But you should be higher than 1500.