Using Opening Theory in Games

Don't worry about your openings at your level, get better at basic tactics and positional motifs... everything else first.

Even the current World Champion doesn't prioritize his opening phase as much as the rest of his game.

IMO, focus on the endgames and pawn structure first. When you understand how those work that'll influence all of your playing decisions.

I'd think it was a bit odd if someone wanted to have the opening book open during a non-correspondence game. Not out-of-the-question, but certainly a bit odd.

The point where I'd use "theory" to learn openings is when you analyse your games (you do analyse your games, right?). Try to play the opening following what you understand of the ideas of the opening and general chess / opening principles. Then analyse your game afterwards:
If it seems like you played the opening alright and got a decent position then don't worry too much.
If it seems like you lost your way in the opening and it caused you long term problems, then compare what you played to what theory (books, videos, GM games, whatever) says is good, and try to understand why the theoretical line fits better with the ideas of the opening and with general chess / opening principles, maybe looking two or three moves further down the theoretical line if it's not immediately obvious.

If you approach it this way then you'll hopefully get more out of it in terms of chess understanding than if you just brute-force memorize a load of moves that you don't understand and might never get to play anyway.

@nchebykin imo there is no reason to focus a lot of time memorizing opening theory until you get to a reasonably intermediate level. If I had to give an arbitrary number, then it would be 1800+ which is "club level".

Specially at OP's level he should be focusing on understanding basic ideas of what makes a good opening (ex: space control particularly the center, developing pieces to maximize options, king safety via castling, piece safety by not hanging pieces or making outright blunders, etc).

He should also focus on learning to recognize patterns with tactical opportunities as well as avoiding/defending against an opponent's tactics. Nasty "tricks" in openings are really just basic tactics that could be spotted if one has a good grasp on recognizing pins, forks, and discovered attacks.

@arfs, there is always something to work on rather than openings, I do agree.

But mixing it up time to time won't hurt, right?

I won approximately 10 games on both lichess and chess.com because I knew Fried Liver theory (+Traxler counter-attack) to a greater extent than my opponents.

It's not the first thing to concentrate on, but you may revise your openings time to time.

It doesn't mean you don't understand why you are doing with those moves (unless you are blindly remembering moves which is obviously something you should not do haha)

Wow, there's a lot of suggestions here!

First about me focusing on things like tactics, endgames, puzzles etc. -- I'll take this advice to heart, but the reason why I want to know more about openings is that I find it boring to always try the same ideas every game (at my rating most people play the same few openings against me so I have no reason to change unless I'm proactive about it). So it's more of a question of what I find fun, than pure improvement. I'm willing to sacrifice the speed at which I improve at for the sake of my enjoyment of the game hahaha.

Secondly -- I didn't realise that correspondence allowed using an opening book (and studying masters' games without an engine -- though I probably won't do it for now), so I'll definitely start trying that! Outside of that, I can do casual games with my friends where I can let them know what opening I'll be trying and so on.

Finally, understanding ideas is a good point, but it can only take a relative beginner so far in my opinion. GMs like Carlsen have the instinct and experience to have these ideas reap a lot of rewards compared to me -- I think memorisation is an inevitability, but not being limited to and focused on *just* memorisation is definitely good advice!

Thanks again for your help :))

'I find it boring to always try the same ideas every game'
It's these boring habits that lead to prevention of early losses. Playing an opening again and again helps you gain experience

"GMs like Carlsen have the instinct and experience to have these ideas reap a lot of rewards compared to me -- I think memorisation is an inevitability, but not being limited to and focused on *just* memorisation is definitely good advice!"

Just one note to that (and I think you already get it) - although many GM's have fantastic memories and some can recall reams of theory, there isn't one who plays a move that he/she doesn't understand. They consider the tactical and positional implications of every move they make, right from the start, and how it will affect the course of the game. In the same way, I suggest that you never play a move that you don't understand, just because it's what the book line is - either figure it out, or play what you think is best and learn from that if it's a mistake. Principled chess and tactical awareness can get you to any middlegame with a respectable position.

@Joey-Bonzo if you want variation for enjoyment that's totally understandable. after all, a person can't improve if they no longer enjoy the game enough to keep playing.

with that said, the solution is simply to just experiment and figure out different openings on your own first without consulting opening theory. there's benefits to this whether you win or lose.

if you lose, then go back and analyze the game to figure out what it is about that opening that made it bad. once you figure it out, you will have very intimate knowledge of why it failed and that will do a couple of things for you 1) you will most likely not repeat something like that (or similar) again 2) you will recognize it immediately when you see your opponents make the same mistake. and you'll know how to exploit it because you have first-hand account of being a victim from it before!

if you win, then you can analyze the game and figure out why it worked. and when you do you can also later check opening theory if you were right. the difference is you'll have better understanding of it than you would have without trying to produce the moves on your own at first.

also have some fun and try going against the grain of good chess principles and intentionally play bad openings, games without castling, disregarding control of the center. you'll have more appreciation of why they work to begin with when you intentionally try not to follow them. for sh**and giggles, search "carlsen bongcloud " on YouTube and watch him annihilate people with very bad openings =D

Btw, GM Daniel Naroditsky said that a lot of coaches underestimate teaching openings, in their training with QTCinderella.

Link: youtu.be/DspU9zQ6ff8?t=1425

I know there is so much people against it, but come one, it's not horrible unless you understand what you are doing