Understanding Openings

I'm having trouble with openings. Using an openings database, i can look at a move it suggests and say that it looks fine... that is, i can't see any problems with it.
The problem comes in that i can't really structure my thoughts as to why it is fine; given the same board situation, a good percentage of the time, i wouldnt come up with that same move myself.
Anyone know of any online resource or book thats worth reading to help with this issue (i'd like to learn how to analyse openings a bit better)?

Cheers,

M

1. Piece Development
2. Pawn Structure
3. King Safety
4. Controlling the Centre

EDIT: Not in order.

Originally posted by noxidjkram
I'm having trouble with openings. Using an openings database, i can look at a move it suggests and say that it looks fine... that is, i can't see any problems with it.
The problem comes in that i can't really structure my thoughts as to why it is fine; given the same board situation, a good percentage of the time, i wouldnt come up with that same move ...[text shortened]... help with this issue (i'd like to learn how to analyse openings a bit better)?

Cheers,

M

Choose an opening that you like and play it exclusively for a year or two.

I think his trouble is deciding which one to pick.

I have a book called 'Chess software users guide' by Byron Jacobs, Jacob Aagaard (what a name!) and John Emms.

It covers using databases and chess engines as study aids. Haven't read aall of it but it shows you how to set up chessbase for study purposes. First off you choose your opening (say KID), you create a new database of these games and do the statistics (to create your opening tree). It then demonstrates how this information can be best used. I reccomend it as a general introduction to using IT based study aids, if i wasn't so lazy i'd probably have a kick ass database by now but finding the time is difficult. Hope this helps 🙂

Do what I do.

Originally posted by hopscotch
Choose an opening that you like and play it exclusively for a year or two.

Shouldn't you also watch your opponents move and play an opening to counteract (or even exploit) theirs, rather than just make the same 4, 5 or 6 first moves?

playing a particular opening doesnt mean the same moves. All opening lines in any opening depend on the opponent's moves..........

After using Bookup several years ago, I began to think of openings as just board positions which may be reached through various move paths (transposing into other variations of possibly very different openings). So when someone says he played a Ruy Lopez, I see: The game could have started 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 or like 1. Nf3 Nc6 2. e4 e5 3. Bb5 but it's still the same position so the same opening.

This is one argument for studying similar openings such as the Caro-Kann and Slav which can have similar positions.

Of course others may have quite different opinions about this view, and had I spent more time studying openings instead of endgames... well who knows.😉

One thing I don't see mentioned here is why the openings go the
way they go: The underlying principle behind ALL the openings is
based on the relative worth of squares on the board. The reason
we develop to the center is simply most of the pieces with the
exception of the rooks: queen, knight, bishop, the power of each
of these pieces is much greater in the center of the board, the
key squares being the four center ones followed by the ones around
them, the big 16 as I call them. So when you push the C,D, E, or F
pawn up two, you immediately establish a toehold in one of the
center four squares, followed by knights backing them up and trying
to get all the power you can right on top of the mountain, those four
center squares. All the openings except for the hypermodern flank
attacks aim at that concept. Even the hypermodern flank ones are
just sneaking up on the center but delayed a few moves. The center
is where the power goes, those four center squares are the top of
the mountain and if you take the high ground you know you have a
decisive advantage. Think of the chess board as a pyramid (I actually
built a chess board like this once) the four center squares on top,
then the surrounding squares one step lower and the squares around
them one step lower still and the four corner squares on the lowest
tier, that gives you a visual of the value of the squares. Once you
have that visual in mind, All of the opening logic will make more
sense. Don