What Chess Openings are the Strongest?

Stonewall attack

yes I am going back to e4 e5, even I that have played more some thousand games feel pretty confused with assymetrical set ups, Im gonna play some classic chess to have a good foundation and later Ill play sicilian, french or caro
but imo e4 e5, makes much more sense to play it and I have not, It is just a very logical thing, very simple to understand
both want the center, there are usually good squares for the four knights, bishops are easy to develop and You usually put a rook in e1 or e8 and you get also minority attacks on queenside and close and open positions, there is plenty to learn in e4 e5, there is no need for beginners to go for other openings, the taste but I feel they are less straightforward they require more serious thought but I dont know perhaps I miss the e4 e5, Im gonna play it,
its just my current feeling perhaps tomorrow or next week I change again, some people recommend to stick to something and learn it througly but I like to mix.

I definitely think it's good to mix it up and learn the basic ideas in a few openings. You could learn everything there is possible to learn in the e4-e5 opening, for instance. But what good is it when your opponent doesn't responde to e4 with e5? And how does it help when your opponent opens White with something other than e4? I think when one begins to look at opening systems, it's important to do 2 things. First I think you should spend a little time in an opening and then move on to the next and get a very basic idea for these different systems; some you will feel mesh with your style of play, others you will dislike. But you will have uncovered various principles and systems for developing pieces in many different ways and many different opening situations.

And 2, you should not stop training tactics and endgame just because you are looking at openings. It is easy to get into the thought of "hey, I have come out of this opening with a much better game than my opponent, I should win!" and then lose the middle game or transition into a lost or drawn endgame. The opening should help you get to a better middle game; very few games are won or lost in the opening, but sometimes a bad opening will result in you having nothing to play for. It's a double edged sword. That's why I agree that learning nothing but move orders is worthless, but I think studying opening systems and principles is definitely worthwhile.

I meant from the black side, seriously e4 is a very common move, It is very easy to get an e4 e5 game, the problem arises later in the subvariations.
Yes I have neglected endgames but I think Its common in blitz or internet chess I mean, endgames is easy to say that you have to study but I feel that most people dont like a lot that part of the game or at least not as much as the other two,
I guess I have to study endgames again
seriously how many of us study endgames?
Not many,
well at least thats what I think
the thing about the endgames is that players under 1800 elo or maybe even higher rarely get an equal endgame,
so if You arrive to an endgame with an extra piece, You really dont have to study almost, so yes maybe is kind of ironic that the common advice is to study endgames
but I think Its true because thats what I did the first time I played chess,
I studied a little ending, pawn ending and then just simplify and promote if u have an ending good which I dont have now, relative to my rating, It gives you the possibility to not play for checkmate or something wild or force a combination and just get a nice good position, You have more possibilities.
So yes endgames are mandatory but building excuses its usually easier.

But I feel I want to study endgames now, suddenly, I have changed my mind.

In fact I was gonna open today a thread about the endgame but Ill do it tomorrow or next week, Im tired now
post endgame positions and challengues, It is really a beautiful aesthetic part probably even more than the other two, well I dont know but its still beautiful, the logic of the endgame.

Learning how the endgame works helps with the plan in the middle game. If you aren't familiar with endgame ideas, you fail to activate your king at the end of the middle game, or you think that passed rook pawn on the other side of the board is going to promote, or you fail to notice that when you trade off all the pieces, if it were your turn you would win, but now since it's the opponent's turn he will draw, and you should have instead played a waiting move, etc. Also, many tactics in the middle game might be about doubling pawns or getting a rook on the 7th for example...but if you don't understand the endgame, what do you do with that sort of stuff? An advantage is only an advantage if you know what to do with it.

Though I agree, in blitz at lower levels, endgames are rarely even seen. And even though they are the simplest positions in terms of material, they can be quite challenging to understand.

Also, my endgame is horrible. Don't think that just because I know why studying endgame is good and even down to specific reasons that I know much at all about how it works. I fail quite often to win endgames that are objectively won. I just did so a few minutes ago. haha