user9069: Is the Scandinavian Defense a good opening for beginners?
I'm wondering this because I'm a beginner and I mainly try to do this opening.

user18809: I don't think there is anything wrong with the Scandinavian itself. The reason why it's not often played at top level is that there are "improved versions" in the Rubinstein French and Caro-Kann Defence, which will leave you with the same pawn structure but all those queen moves in the opening are not needed

user10233: Just as a preference, 1 e4 d5 2. exd5 Nf6 is a different (modern treatment?) method to play, allowing you to capture on d5 with a piece, avoiding the tempo play by white after 2. ... Qxd5 3. Nc3, etc. Either way, there is little risk. 
Some points about the Scandinavian Defense:
Positionally Quiet;
One of the simplest openings for Black;
There is only one type of pawn structure in the centre characterized by a 1/2-open file for both sides.;
All of Black's pieces have good squares to develop to.;
Black's pawn structure (after e6 and c6) has no weaknesses;
Offers White no direct attack against the Black king;
White has a space advantage;
Black is slightly passive;
The Portuguese Gambit (1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Nf6 3. d4 Bg4) was recently featured in New In Chess Yearbook #117.
Unless you are a top flight player, it is completely reasonable to include it in your repertoire.

user279: In my opinion you should try other openings as well.
The Scandinavian itself is sound, but it actually doesn't teach you many "basic opening principles". It breaks some of them, instead (like "avoid moving your pieces twice" and "develop your light pieces before your heavy pieces").
Since there's a strategy beyond the opening despite all these "side effects", it's good anyway. But in the long term you could end up with very bad habits if you continue playing it without critical reasoning.
So, as a conclusion, I would not recommend the Scandinavian if you are a beginner. I think that other openings are better, at your level (like the Philidor defence, the 2 Knights or the Ruy Lopez), even if the theory behind is much more difficult to study: but you shouldn't memorize all the lines... instead, you should try to understand the principles behind the first moves of each of these openings.

user-1: The opening is playable at all levels, though quite rare in grandmaster play. Here is what chess.com says on the opening:

Although the Scandinavian is not played much by grandmasters, it is generally considered to be an opening that is easy to learn and worth trying out for beginners and club level players.

I believe the appeal of the opening is that it is quite conceptual. After 3...Qa5, the mainline, none of the pieces are attacking each other, meaning that there aren't many tactics or much theory in the early part of the game.
[FEN ""]

1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 3. Nc3 Qa5 4.d4 c6 {Creating a bolt hole for the queen if she is attacked.} 5.Nf3 Nf6 6.Bc4 Bf5 {Developing the bishop before locking it outside of the pawn chain.} 7.Bd2 e6 {Black will develop the dark square bishop, castle kingside, then play for central pawn breaks.}

Both sides have developed simply and logically.
Edit: Others have stated the Scandinavian is not testing at the high level. If you wish to employ different openings later on, the caro-kann and slav-defense have good reputations and similar pawn structures to the Scandinavian.

9069: <p>Is the Scandinavian Defense a good opening for beginners?</p>

<p>I'm wondering this because I'm a beginner and I mainly try to do this opening.</p>
 18809: <p>I don't think there is anything wrong with the Scandinavian itself. The reason why it's not often played at top level is that there are "improved versions" in the Rubinstein French and Caro-Kann Defence, which will leave you with the same pawn structure but all those queen moves in the opening are not needed</p>
 10233: <p>Just as a preference, 1 e4 d5 2. exd5 Nf6 is a different (modern treatment?) method to play, allowing you to capture on d5 with a piece, avoiding the tempo play by white after 2. ... Qxd5 3. Nc3, etc. Either way, there is little risk. </p>

<p>Some points about the Scandinavian Defense:</p>

<p>Positionally Quiet;
One of the simplest openings for Black;
There is only one type of pawn structure in the centre characterized by a 1/2-open file for both sides.;
All of Black's pieces have good squares to develop to.;
Black's pawn structure (after e6 and c6) has no weaknesses;
Offers White no direct attack against the Black king;
White has a space advantage;
Black is slightly passive;</p>

<p>The Portuguese Gambit (1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Nf6 3. d4 Bg4) was recently featured in New In Chess Yearbook #117.</p>

<p>Unless you are a top flight player, it is completely reasonable to include it in your repertoire.</p>
 279: <p>In my opinion you should try other openings as well.</p>

<p>The Scandinavian itself is sound, but it actually doesn't teach you many "basic opening principles". It breaks some of them, instead (like "avoid moving your pieces twice" and "develop your light pieces before your heavy pieces").</p>

<p>Since there's a strategy beyond the opening despite all these "side effects", it's good anyway. But in the long term you could end up with very bad habits if you continue playing it without critical reasoning.</p>

<p>So, as a conclusion, I would not recommend the Scandinavian if you are a beginner. I think that other openings are better, at your level (like the Philidor defence, the 2 Knights or the Ruy Lopez), even if the theory behind is much more difficult to study: but you shouldn't memorize all the lines... instead, you should try to understand the principles behind the first moves of each of these openings.</p>
 -1: <p>The opening is playable at all levels, though quite rare in grandmaster play. Here is what <a href="https://www.chess.com/chessopedia/view/scandinavian-defense" rel="nofollow noreferrer">chess.com</a> says on the opening:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Although the Scandinavian is not played much by grandmasters, it is generally considered to be an opening that is easy to learn and worth trying out for beginners and club level players.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>I believe the appeal of the opening is that it is quite conceptual. After 3...Qa5, the mainline, none of the pieces are attacking each other, meaning that there aren't many tactics or much theory in the early part of the game.</p>

<pre><code>[FEN ""]

1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 3. Nc3 Qa5 4.d4 c6 {Creating a bolt hole for the queen if she is attacked.} 5.Nf3 Nf6 6.Bc4 Bf5 {Developing the bishop before locking it outside of the pawn chain.} 7.Bd2 e6 {Black will develop the dark square bishop, castle kingside, then play for central pawn breaks.}
</code></pre>

<p>Both sides have developed simply and logically.</p>

<p><strong>Edit:</strong> Others have stated the Scandinavian is not testing at the high level. If you wish to employ different openings later on, the <a href="/questions/tagged/caro-kann" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;caro-kann&#39;" rel="tag">caro-kann</a> and <a href="/questions/tagged/slav-defense" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;slav-defense&#39;" rel="tag">slav-defense</a> have good reputations and similar pawn structures to the Scandinavian.</p>
