Modern Defence - is it worth it?

At first, everybody should play 1.e4 e5 and 1.d4 d5.

Best to learn, at all level.

Playing 1...b6, 1...g6, and other things giving more space is just wasting time for your learning, and could give u many depressing defeats.

If u want to be disgusted playing chess, that's the way!

i think this is pretty darn dogmatic. 

Naka actually has a pretty interesting video on "Best openings for beginners" tier, and a lot of the classical suggestions are discarded as suboptimal. 

most important thing for beginners is to get stable positions, and then the rest is experience and pattern recognition, not play "proper chess".  Openings only begin to matter more when you become a class player. Only reason im adamant on modern at that level is that there will be a lot of "re-learning" as you get stronger, as you cant get away with as much as your opponents book up more.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9CwH47r6og

Look at what ranks high. Yes, you see classical pawn formations too, but you also see closed sicilians (stable) and Danish gambit (its good for learning). 29:50, "1.e4 e5" is tricky, cuz you have to defend a lot early on, if your opponent knows what they are doing". i tend to concur with this assessment. 

If u trust Naka, fine for you, I have doubts on his sincerity.

U want/like to be nonconformist? Fine, but for beginners, everybody knows since ages u have to fight for centre and initiative. Clearly not what black is doing (at beginner's level).

As beginner and after, u should play what looks natural to you. Maybe for you it is these kind of offbeat openings, but for begginers, it just slows their growth.

idk how much of "it slows down your growth" is true, or just a kind of common wisdom people just assume to be the case.

i did really well with 1.b6 as a scholastic player, it almost got boring how often i ended up winning the e4 pawn in the first 10 moves.  I dont think i would have grown faster with a normal opening.

I dont think most  beginner players should begin with these hypermodern openings to be fair, but there is a difference between that, and thinking all beginners should play these symmetrical center pawn games.

As A Die-Hard Sicillian Fan, I don't like the modern, however, I do like the French. The Modern suits the Bishop-Over-Knight fan, which I'm not. The Modern doesn't immediately fight for the center yet it places the bishop on a somewhat passive  diagonal. To be honest with a beginner mindset, I don't want my bishop over there. Though the Bishop can go to some hyperactive places during a Middle Game Attack, I don't want to wait that long.

poucin is correct, as usual. No one in their right mind would suggest 1..b6 to a beginner.

except you can play 1.b6 agaisnt any of the top 4 moves! thats how i did as a scholastic player and still do.

and the same issue you get there you get with 1.b6, just like the english defense, QID and owen dont have similar themes despite looking similar, the pirc and KID dont play the same.

I don't recommend this opening this opening is not so good choice I played this a few times and at first it was sucessful but then I started getting hammered

as someone who is fairly new to chess - I played occasionally for a long time but just this year started using chess.com, I have come to love the modern - mainly because it can transpose, into the dutch and the king's indian, both strong defences. The modern, and all of it's transpositions and variations have proven pretty strong for my defensive playstyle. I agree that the modern, especially in the hands of a beginner can be very vulnerable to pawn pushes, but after putting in the time to figure it out I've learned to adjust the play order and deal with the common push (E4-E5 and then D4). I also really agree with a comment I saw about how the modern teaches you to calculate and deal with dynamic positions. As long as you are up to the challenge, the modern can give you playable, interesting games, gives you practice at long-term planning / calculating, and lets you explore lots of different lines to increase your vocabulary. I recommend on easing into it by statring with the dutch or king's indian and gradually implementing bits of theory whenever you see the chance.

My last comment is that if you use the modern, you should play longer games (no bullet, start out on 15|10 instead of 10), and that you will do significantly better if you are using a computer (as opposed to a mobile device) to play where you can see the pieces and connections more easily - (and look up theory more quickly and effectively).

Modern Defence is a good idea: you can play it with black against everything and you can play it as white with colors reversed. It sometimes leads to cramped positions, but it is OK.

Great point

not if you counter it by restricting their pieces well enough 

Personally, I think the modern is good to throw your opponents off at a low level since most games are either 4 knights or some random made-up opening. It's also good for linking different openings together if you're trying to learn them in conjunction with each other. I also found the positions fun to think about because of their complexity, and I feel a little less bad losing complex positional or tactical games than I would simple ones. Also, winning those games do feel awesome! Definitely would recommend this opening to switch things up a little and bring more fun into the game. I mean, unless you're training to be NM/IM, chess is more about getting better while having fun, and the modern is suited to help you to that end.

I wouldn't recommend 1.e4 e5 to beginners because it really is tricky to play the Black side of such positions, and there are a lot of dangerous tries that White can choose.

On the other hand, the Modern is way too difficult to play as a beginner. Sure, you'll definitely be able to win games with it, but allowing full central control by your opponent is not the way to go as someone starting out.

Personally, I have recommended the Scandi, the Caro, and the French. I think all of these are quite solid options that most opposing players will not really know how to play against.

Yes. It transposes to reti opening at a later stage.

I don't think so.

Black rarely plays ...d5 in the modern (apart from Gurgenidze setups) so it seems unlikely that a Reti transposition exists.

Which line in the modern transposes to a Reti opening?

Eh....maybe.

I think the KID/Dragon (I don't know how you get the Dragon lol, but okay) are more okay because they do lay a stake in the center and the game plan is relatively clear.

The Modern, on the other hand, is more difficult IMO

At 1600s, it's a little bit tricky to face but usually, I put my pieces in the center and try to get a Pirc. Most of the time they fall for a trap so I'm happy