JoseDK wrote:
Kasparov had an inordinate fear of the Sicilian, IIRC, which may explain his aversion to 1. e4.
http://chessgames.com/perl/explorer?pid=15940&side=white
He didnt exactly avoid e4, he had almost as many games as he did o d4
1. e4 vs 1. d4
Sort:
Reb wrote:
I play both 1 e4 and 1 d4 ...... why ? I get tired of sicilians ! I play sicilians as black and if I play 1e4 I also face many sicilians. When more than 50% of your games are sicilians the only way to ensure some variety is to play something other than 1e4, OR quit playing the sicilian yourself. Also, I think its good to be able "to hit with both hands" . ( an expression borrowed from boxers )
Agree as variety keeps the game interesting.
I play 1.e4 because I HATE 1. d4 d5, but thats just my opinion.
I think its easier to beat the sicilian than to beat lets say... Queen's gambit semi slav
Oraoradeki wrote:
I play 1.e4 because I HATE 1. d4 d5, but thats just my opinion.
I think its easier to beat the sicilian than to beat lets say... Queen's gambit semi slav
Yeah which variation?
Feb 2, 2013
0
#186
Cogwheel wrote:
Why so many threads on this topic recently?
It is the eternal question!
This is a e4 chess site against the few d4 players in reference to the e4 players. So the e4 players are confused when they come across a strong d4 player.
Huh?
royalbishop wrote:
This is a e4 chess site against the few d4 players in reference to the e4 players. So the e4 players are confused when they come across a strong d4 player.
I was just going to say that.
E4 players here mostly! Huh nothing.
When faced against a strong d4 player well nature takes over. This is the only chess site i been where the d4 players were not dominate.
both of them.
AND 1 Nf3... "it depends"?
1.e4 -> never play a endgame.
2.d4 -> always play a endgame.
I used to play 1.e4, but then I realised I was falling asleep too often in my games, especially after 1...e5.
The best way to decide whether you want to start with e4 or d4, is to try those openings in game tournaments.
Playing e4 doesn't mean that your game is going to be only tactical. On the other hand d4 doen't lead only to positional situations. ALL openings require good understanding of tactics, strategy, endgame etc.
The main differences among openings are the various ideas behind those openings and the different pawn-structures.
Don't forget that all great GMs play/played all kind of openings (e4,d4,c4,Nf3) like Karpov, Kasparov, Carlsen
Jul 22, 2013
0
#195
I like 1. e4 because of variety. 1.. c5 becomes sharp and nice, 1... e5 becomes the ruy lopez which is positionally complicated.
nqi wrote:
I am a fan of 1d4, simply because it is Sicilian-proof. I never like going into the second move of a game with the feeling my opponent knows what the next twenty moves are going to be
D4 = Better for defense.
E4 = Better for attack.
Attack && Defense are equal opposites. Not the tool, It's how it is used.
Which is better?
...
Neither. Use whatever it takes to win! - Happy Debates!
I play 1.edc4gNf3 and I spend too much time studying. But I don't get bored playing the same thing every time so I think my way is better.
Why can't it be a defense?
Aug 29, 2013
0
#199
unterseegoat wrote:
Why can't it be a defense?
Because white goes on the attack on move 1 if he knows what he's doing.
Having been assaulted by d4, I can attest that it is not defensive unless White doesn't have the guts to play aggressively.
PositionalDude wrote:
D4 is better for defense?!?!??!? it's not a defense,it's a attacking tool and also a positional tool to play as white
You have no idea how patterns work, how positions work, don't bring up the entire elo debate, Point is: D4 Is Defensive. E4 Is An Attack. D4 IS Backed by the queen controlling center and is less pro-active due to E4 Being the best move for White. ... D4 Defensive/Less-Pro-Active. E4/Attack/Aggressive.
Cya.
I've thought about opening 1. d4... but then I decided that life is too short.