E4. The Sicilian is not bad, you can either transpose or just play the Rauzer System
1. e4 vs 1. d4
Sort:
I vote e4. Most d4 games end up slow, boring, and quiet.
both are equally good in their own ways
I vote e4 because its more fun
On explorer there are 879354 e4 games to 692967 d4 games. There are 186387 more e4 games than d4 games
Optimissed wrote:
aadaam wrote:
For rubbishy amateur players like myself 1.d4 has a tendency to produce tame, boring games; bits develop onto better squares, bits get swapped off with no harm done, nothing happens. 1.e4 gives you more chance of an exciting game; you're drawn into a 'situation' which only one player will survive.>>>
And that's the very reason why 1. d4 is superior for people who understand some of the ideas and who are prepared to put some work into improving that understanding, because, as you admit, you don't understand how to produce tension in QP games. One only has to walk into a chess congress and eavesdrop at random, to hear conversations along the lines of "I've no idea how to play QP games against well-prepared players and I just hack it and hope for the best". It even exists in Major tournaments, although hopefully not in Opens.
"BULL!!" ...
And that's the way I see it! ... H'heh-Hah! - eh? - 'champs'!
Nov 30, 2017
0
#288
both suck . . . same boring, predictable crap everyone else already fully knows. 1. g4!!
Looks like mckn3hd's account has been refuted.
both are best moves!
"1 P- Q4 This is the best move on the board - and so is 1 P-K4 !" - Irving Chernev
nice
AlphaZero says that 1.d4 is the best. I tend to agree.
e4 may against with Sicilian or French defense.....and d4 may against with ragozin defense
but I like to play c4
C4 may be too passive. It controls the d5 square (like e4 does) but doesn't open a diagonal for a bishop.
c4!!! :D
Aug 8, 2019
0
#300
Always an age-old question for me especially that I seem to prefer 1. d4 but my heroes, Bronstein and Stein preferred 1.e4 players even though the former also plays 1.d4 a lot. In my actual experience, online as I seldom play OTB, 1. d4 allows a freer game, more space for the pieces to maneuver which provides more options to attack. In the case of 1. e4, maneuvering space is somewhat constricted and scope of the pieces are more restricted especially in many variations, of the French Defence. And if I play 1. e4 to generate an attacking game, I would not want to play the so-called Anti-Sicilian Systems. And why did Bobby Fischer preferred 1. e4? My guess is that with this opening, he could take advantage of his superior knowledge of the sharp lines of opening theory against his opponents because of his devotion to a study of the games and reading a whole lot of chess journals including the Shakmaty v. SSSR (Chess in the USSR). In this Internet age, I doubt if he would still exclusively open with 1. e4 had he been playing today.
That is not the problem. I just don't like the positions White gets in any kind of Sicilian. I want to enjoy my chess. I don't want to sit there for hours playing positions that I don't like, when I could be enjoying myself in a 1. d4 game (or doing something completely different).
As for the Morra gambit (why does Smith get to add his name) I think it is just bad. Or rather, it is only good for a draw. If I was still playing 1. e4 it would not be my choice against 1. ... c5.