1 f4 is it playable ?

1 f4 e6 2 Nf3 d5 3 e3 Nc6 4 Bb5 Bc5 5 Bxc6 bxc6 6 0-0

1.e3 is the Van Kruy's Opening.  I normally shift it into a Keoni Hiva Gambit
with 1...e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.f4 exf4 4.Nf3 sacrificing the e & d pawns for
development.

AAARGH ! DESCRIPTIVE NOTATION, URGH ! MY EYES !

Sorry for that, but you should learn and use algebraic notation instead. You won't find any modern book in descriptive, you will find a "translation" of almost every old book, and not even 1% of people still use it.

(and additionnally, it's more clear, but that' debatable)

Kasparov played it against Fritz in the early days of man vs. machine (when men still held the upper hand).

To answer the original question - Scholar's Mate.

1.P-KB3 P-K4 2.P-KN4 Q-R5# would be fools mate.

Thanks JamesColeman

Is f4 playable

Legally?  Yes, but 1.f4 only scores 46%, which sucks when you are the one going first!

yes

Looks 'algebraic' to me (descriptive would be P-K4, etc.).

sftac

ps.  1. f4 is not playable imo.  1. d4, 2. e3, and 3. f4 have been my favourite opening for decades as white.

I changed it

Bird's Opening 1.f4

Is it playable? Yes, of course!

Is it as strong as 1.e4, 1.d4?

most probably not.

If you know a lot about it and your opponent doesn't, however, it can be a strong white weapon for occasional use. I feel that 1.Nc3 and 1.b3 also fit into this box

I've played it as white for a change and my results were not as good as when I played 1.e4 - I did get interesting games though!

The main thing for white is to have a plan on how to meet 1.f4 e5

which is the From Gambit - this put me off playing Bird's Opening for years and years!

My advice is to be flexible with what setup you play. Too many club players go 2.b3 or 3.b3 all the time.

Tim Taylor wrote a decent book on this opening in which he goes into the different setups for white.

f4 is the best opening in my mind

F4 e5 nf3 c6 fxe5 d6 exd6

It's a bit strange that top players never open 1. f4. I mean, Nakamura frequently plays the Dutch, Radjabov often plays the Schliemann, both with an early f5, and Carlsen has even won with the King's Gambit in a top tournament, as well as with 1. a4 in a World Championship game (ok, it was blitz so I guess that shouldn't count). But I don't recall any top player going for 1. f4 lately and it doesn't seem like a bad opening, at least not for players like Carlsen or Morozevich, who like to leave the beaten track early.

I just had to check, and neither Carlsen nor Morozevich ever opened 1. f4 during their whole careers, not even in blitz, and they sure have tried many unusual things, like a4, a3, Nc3 etc.

It's playable and seeing as there are a few approaches to it your opponents will likely be on their own. You also should watch From's gambit games so you don't lose to cheapos. It's the only theory I think you need to know anyway so it's worth a little time.

If black plays the from gambit white can transpose into the king's gambit.

The Dutch and the Schliemann are perfectly fine openings (if maybe a bit crazy). The fact that they are played regularly, unlike the Bird, is a good pointer that GMs consider it as worse than those two. They do not look the same as the Bird at all (apart from the fact the f pawn is pushed two squares, but that doesn't mean much).

And Carlsen's 1.a4 (if sourced) is pure trolling from him.