1. e4 vs 1. d4

This forum is where we will discuss which first move is better.

e4 or d4?

Cam

I'l start us off.

I think e4 is better because I believe it is easier to develop the queen pawn afterwards to d4 because of the immediate protection of the queen.

Also I believe you get better attacks going.

I don't mind playing d4 though, but my first choice move is e4.

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  

Sorry, I meant the queen"pawn".

I have edited it now.

This does not mean that I think the queen pawn is better.

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.

d4 is safer e4 is wery difficult to tie down you have to rady for so many aggressive opening that i would start on d4 it is all the same same pins same breakthrughs for all its diferences all moves are same d4 dude

Are you kidding me 1.d4? Is one of a kind. Ever see Magnus Carlsen's games and his novelty openenings? Queen pawn openings are amazing.  I've played queen openings for a year or so, i avoided e4 due to the majority.  But i managed to defeat some strong player rated in the 1600s USCF with queen pawn.  Defeated a 1200 on USCF quick by using the queen opening.  The queen (1.d4) opening can be deadly.

Personally, I prefer 1.d4. That's since I started playing chess 25 years ago. I rarely open with 1.e4. I planned to do, but I want to study the openings much more, especially the Sicilian. Just like nqi, i don't want to play the Sicilian with white due to lack of knowledge about it.

When I get e4 against me playing black, I usually play Caro Kann.

For Grandmasters, e4 is more popular.

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 )

I have just been researching the London system, and I think I might give it a go.

I'm going to start playing d4 a bit now.

I always play e4.

Let's have a bit of variety!

I like the Reti as well.

Nosferatu, I think the debate is just between e4 and d4, not what is the best opening move .

I prefer e4 but thats because I'm so used to it now, I don't really have a lot of practice in any 1. d4 openings and so consequently I will play worse.

I am going to do another forum on which is 2. Nc3 vs 2. Nf3.

play the smith-morra gambit

1. e4 c5 2. d4 cxd4 3. c3                gives white lots of attacking chances and there is a great video on it on youtube!

Freddie, your playing the Smith-Morra gambit against me at the moment...

Your beating me. I just did the worst possible move I could. (Except resign!).

D4 is not boring !!! I bet half of us would never be able to see through the complexities of the semi Slav and Slav proper from either side of the board not to mention the Indian defences which set up a battle between whites better center and blacks better pieces . a battle which lasts the entire game ( much longer than any one tactical slugfest) And then there is the Dutch which though little played could be considered the Sicilian of d4 land as there are many decisive results ! Also i would like to point out that the winning percentages in d4 land are slightly higher for white  

e4 tends to lead to open games that means drawish at high level if a gm lets say 2500 wants to draw a gm 2550 he will go on e4 looking for some dull middle game like in petrof or scotch, then again if a gm 2500 is playing a weaker player lets say 2200 he will also go e4 simply because weaker tends to mean lack of good tactics and opening knowledge, that will be deadly in an open game. 1 d4 tends to go into a more positional game type and is hallenging black to go on some not completely sound game plans like in kings indian when attacking/developing kingside neglecting the queenside completely, or to get into the benko gambit. Most of the cases white will end up playing QG (queens gambit) lines accepted or declined, or the slav defence, wich at least will guarantee white some more space to maneuver and development but it will be a slow maneuvering game if well played obviously

For not so good level lets say 2200 below I must say just play what you like no one really knows that much theorie, probably most of your opponents won't even follow the basic opening rules

Even lower rated people know their oppenings quite well.

In correspondence chess many people use databases as far down as 1500 and with a database a 1500 can know more theory than some GM's.

On live chess sites I've met many weak players that knew a lot of theory especially in the sicilians I usually end up playing up to 20+ book moves even when playing people under 1600.

Lately I haven't been able to get any advantage with the moller attack in blitz which is quite an obscure line and also extremly trappy a lot of theory is requiered to be able to survive it as black, I still manage to win games with it even though I end up in inferior positions.

I can't speak about OTB but I suspect that there it's the same case.