1 f4 is it playable ?

Sort:
pps1
dodgecharger1968 wrote:

I play the Nimzo, and I'm always aiming for that setup.  You can definitely play the Classical Bird like a reversed Nimzo (or QID) just like the Lenningrad can be a reversed KID.  You already played the fpawn out, so you have extra control of e5 from the get-go.  I don't know any reason to call that setup with Qb6 a "Rubenstein", or the line that follows a "trap", but maybe I'm missing something.

i am sorry it s not rubenstein ther is a varition in the dutch rubenstein i git them mixed up

TetsuoShima
Irontiger wrote:
fabelhaft wrote:

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 (...)

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.


and still i believe there was a danish GM who won the danish open a few years back, who said in a new in chess interview he played f4 because he is too lazy to keep up with opening theory

royalbishop
TetsuoShima wrote:
Irontiger wrote:
fabelhaft wrote:

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 (...)

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.


and still i believe there was a danish GM who won the danish open a few years back, who said in a new in chess interview he played f4 because he is too lazy to keep up with opening theory

Smile

bunglebrain

Is 1.c4 playable?  Smile

Black has lots of differnet setups to choose from....

bunglebrain

Two very good posts by melvinbluestone SmileSmile

dpcarballo

1. f4 is the best choice against booked opponents

pps1
bunglebrain wrote:

Is 1.c4 playable? 

Black has lots of differnet setups to choose from....

c4 makes no weakness no adventeges the game is borring and white has just one tempo advanteg nothing else

Irontiger
pps1 wrote:
bunglebrain wrote:

Is 1.c4 playable? 

Black has lots of differnet setups to choose from....

c4 makes no weakness no adventeges the game is borring and white has just one tempo advanteg nothing else

Wrong.

Depends on what's next, as usual.

Just like in any decent opening.

Ziryab

There are twenty legal first moves. Eighteen or nineteen are playable. Two are superior to eighteen others. Three are superior to fifteen others. Three or four more are better than eleven or twelve. 1.f4 is in the second set of three; 1.c4 is in the first set of three.

dodgecharger1968

Realistically, if you don't know why 1f4 is inferior, your opponent probably won't either.  And if they do, you probably were already behind the 8-ball.  An opening like 1f4 is like going to your favorite filthy little diner, ordering the usual without looking at the menu, and hanging around picking out the regulars and the strangers while you drink overcooked coffee.  It's comfortable, you know what it looks like when it's good and you know what to expect when it's bad.  Ruy Lopez, Queen's Gambit, Najdorf Sicilian...you have to dress up, make reservations, pay through the nose.  You can't deny it's better, but is it worth it?  If you have the means, yes.  If only the best will do, yes.  Otherwise, the Bird is playable without being too complicated.

dpcarballo

1. f4 is a poor choice against stronger opponents. Well, only two months ago I (1900) beat up an IM in 10 moves with it.

And, if you go to a tourney and you face your opponent, you MUST know if he's a booked player or not. You are playing against an opponent, not against a board, so it's a key to know as much as you can about him!

dpcarballo
Ziryab escribió:

There are twenty legal first moves. Eighteen or nineteen are playable. Two are superior to eighteen others. Three are superior to fifteen others. Three or four more are better than eleven or twelve. 1.f4 is in the second set of three; 1.c4 is in the first set of three.

We are not talking about phylosophy but about CHESS. Just tell me why is 1.f4 in the "second set"

chiaroscuro62

ah..poof.  Plat what you like.  I've lost hundreds of chess games to 1 f4.  So has everyone else.

Ziryab
dpcarballo wrote:
Ziryab escribió:

There are twenty legal first moves. Eighteen or nineteen are playable. Two are superior to eighteen others. Three are superior to fifteen others. Three or four more are better than eleven or twelve. 1.f4 is in the second set of three; 1.c4 is in the first set of three.

We are not talking about phylosophy but about CHESS. Just tell me why is 1.f4 in the "second set"

1.f4 is in the second set of three. It is inferior to 1.e4, d4, Nf3, g3, and c4. It is equal to 1.b3 and 1.g4.

dodgecharger1968
dpcarballo wrote:
Ziryab escribió:

There are twenty legal first moves. Eighteen or nineteen are playable. Two are superior to eighteen others. Three are superior to fifteen others. Three or four more are better than eleven or twelve. 1.f4 is in the second set of three; 1.c4 is in the first set of three.

We are not talking about phylosophy but about CHESS. Just tell me why is 1.f4 in the "second set"

You can't lose a game with your first move (as far as we know), so all 20 are "playable".  I also thought it was a little heavy-handed to put (presumably) d4 and e4 above c4 and (presumably) Nf3 and g3 when those openings are generally acknowledged to be equally effective in maintaining white's advantage, but it's nevertheless fair to say f4 is in the vicinity of the 7th best scoring opening.  For most of us, though, I think we need to look for a "value" opening:  something that doesn't take too much time to learn or too much study to understand, and the Bird falls into that group.  If you try to play a Ruy Lopez and run out of ideas at move 5 or 6, you're in trouble; with the Bird your plan is right there most of the time.

dodgecharger1968

You'd put the Grob higher than the Orangutan OR Nc3?  Interesting...

Paul_A_88

b4 is playable - any chess move is playable - maybe it wont give you an advantage... :)

beardogjones

I tried to play f4 but the pawn slipped and ended up on f3 - so for me f4 is not playable.

Ziryab

Every opening move is more playable for those with experience playing 1.e4 and 1.d4. I play 1.f4 on occasion, and sometimes meet 1...e5 with 2.e4. Without experience playing the King's Gambit via the normal move order, this would be foolish.

Having played 1.g3, 1.Nf3, and 1.c4 quite often in tournament conditions, and having studied many GM games with these beginnings, I am confident that I can say that White's advantage is less apparent after these moves. Games with these beginnings either transpose into 1.e4 and 1.d4 openings, or they allow Black to equalize. They lead to victories because players who use them are able to use their strategic understanding to gain an advantage in the middle game or endgame, not because they maintain the advantage of the first move.

(Of course, the 18 or 19 was bait. Thanks for being the fish.) 

Ziryab
beardogjones wrote:

I tried to play f4 but the pawn slipped and ended up on f3 - so for me f4 is not playable.

As long as you play 2.Kf2, you'll be okay.