Changing openings for extremely long term improvement.

Im 16 years old with rating of lichess rapid 2000/blitz 1900 and cfc 1200.

My current repertoire is QG/e4e5/QGD, and Im actually thinking of switching to something that exposes me to more complex position like Ruy Lopez/Najdorf/Grunfeld for sake of long term improvement, but Im not sure if the benefit of playing the latter surpasses the benefit of sticking to the one that Im more familiar with, considering that Im not especially young.

I would like to hear your opinion on this topic.

@Chambaru said in #1:
> Im 16 years old ... considering that Im not especially young.
I noticed that there are people who believe that if you are not a grandmaster in 15, you are a lost case, but... seriously? I'm 50 next month and if something stays in the way of studying openings I would be interested in, it's lack of free time, not my age.

> with rating of lichess rapid 2000/blitz 1900
Your profile seems to disagree...

@mkubecek said in #2:
> I noticed that there are people who believe that if you are not a grandmaster in 15, you are a lost case, but... seriously? I'm 50 next month and if something stays in the way of studying openings I would be interested in, it's lack of free time, not my age.
>

Of course one can learn any opening at any age, but it would be a different story in terms of proficiency and practice.

> Your profile seems to disagree...

Suggest you to check out the bio

I'm 60 in a few months so I'm still quite young. And for my own chess I think I ought to be varying my openings a bit more and trying new ones. Yes, if you have been considering trying new openings, don't be shy of doing so. I can't remember who it was, but one of the great masters once said that a chessplayer shows signs of maturity in their game when they change their opening repertoire.

If you just stick to the same old openings that you've always been used to, your play may become stereotyped and stagnant.

Now I should try and follow my own advice. It's not easy...

Can't say I understand why people write to the forum under a different account than they are actually using to play. And even less why those people seem so surprised that others might expect them to follow the ToS. :-)

@mkubecek said in #5:
> Can't say I understand why people write to the forum under a different account than they are actually using to play. And even less why those people seem so surprised that others might expect them to follow the ToS. :-)

Yes, it threw me too, but there can be good reasons for having a second account.

Hello!
I would like to double on the question.
I have one opening currently (e4/caro/classical slav) and wondering when is the right time to pick one more.
Sure learning more openings is good for improving my game, but is it actually more beneficial than doing puzzles/studying theoretical endgames/reading books on middlegame or endgame strategy?
What do you think?
P.S. I play only online so nobody preps for me afaik :) .

@Chambaru you e been playing games actively and are 1400s. I wouldn’t even worry to much about the opening. Just stick with the same thing as white and learn the middle/end game

Should I do new things to learn new things or should I do old things to learn new things?

@Chambaru said in #1:
> Im 16 years old with rating of lichess rapid 2000/blitz 1900 and cfc 1200.
>
> My current repertoire is QG/e4e5/QGD, and Im actually thinking of switching to something that exposes me to more complex position like Ruy Lopez/Najdorf/Grunfeld for sake of long term improvement, but Im not sure if the benefit of playing the latter surpasses the benefit of sticking to the one that Im more familiar with, considering that Im not especially young.
>
> I would like to hear your opinion on this topic.

The answer is simple:
If you are bored with the types of games you end up with, change something.
You will improve faster if you have fun playing. Bill