Teach an opening that makes me 1700 ELO

Kindaspingey. Definitely, yes. But you missed the point. It takes a lot of time and you cannot progress futher without further studying. I am accurate for my words. I do not like it, but it is a fact.

@nadjarostowa said in #8:

... Chess games are not decided in the opening. ... 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.
Is deciding a game the only issue? Isn't it somewhat important as to who is more likely to be the one to make the deciding mistake? We have notations like

=
(for "white stands slightly better"). That certainly does not mean that "white has a decisive advantage". We have a separate notation ("+-") for that. So, how can the "advantage" be anything other than it being harder for Black to avoid a decisive mistake? Isn't it therefore somewhat important as to who manages to avoid a slight (or not-so-slight) disadvantage?

@Sandy1966-05 said in #5:

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.
@kindaspongey said in #7:
[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 #11:
Kindaspingey. Definitely, yes. But you missed the point. It takes a lot of time and you cannot progress futher without further studying. I am accurate for my words. I do not like it, but it is a fact.
My post #7 was not attempting to address any "point" from your #5.
For what it is worth, my guess is that, for many players, studying-London-or-some-gambits would be a completely impractical way to attempt to reach 1700.

@kindaspongey said in #13:

My post #7 was not attempting to address any "point" from your #5.
For what it is worth, my guess is that, for many players, studying-London-or-some-gambits would be a completely impractical way to attempt to reach 1700.
It's practical, as long the topic-starter set it.

It seems to me that you don't have enough experience to draw such conclusions. 1700 is not some unattainable. You can get it right after registration with some luck. Interesting things start above 2000.

E4 xxx

I was 800+ on lichess.. I climbed by focusing on my openings. Now I try to specialize or get good at d4 with white and with black I have two openings I spend a lot of time learning which is the Pirc defense d6 and the Sicilian defence c5 against e4.

"I do not fear the one that played ten thousand different openings, but the one that played the SAME opening ten thousand times.."

I follow this advice..

@tonymidtrud said in #16:

Now I try to specialize or get good at d4 with white and with black I have two openings I spend a lot of time learning which is the Pirc defense d6 and the Sicilian defence c5 against e4.
I tried sicilian, then I tried Pirc and finally I returned to sicilian. For me, sicilian is good and Pirc is bad (unless you spend a lot of time, maybe, hundreds of hours, to study it).
You also have to play something against d4, especially, against London, and something against English.

@Sandy1966-05 said in #17:

I tried sicilian, then I tried Pirc and finally I returned to sicilian. For me, sicilian is good and Pirc is bad (unless you spend a lot of time, maybe, hundreds of hours, to study it).
You also have to play something against d4, especially, against London, and something against English.

The Pirc is playable at 2400+ on chess.com and yes you would need to get into this opening to fully understand the potential this opening has to offer. Besides this opening is like Kings Indian played at the top. I believe the KID was played in the candidates for world championship.

@tonymidtrud said in #18:

Besides this opening is like Kings Indian played at the top.
Not quite sure about this. I played against KID, and my opponents were 1500-1800 ELO FIDE (OTB). It's tough opening if you paly against it. Pirc requires much more understanding.

@Sandy1966-05 said in #19:

Not quite sure about this. I played against KID, and my opponents were 1500-1800 ELO FIDE (OTB). It's tough opening if you paly against it. Pirc requires much more understanding.

I agree, hence why I keep playing it because I see the potential in this opening.