Bored with 1.e4

I am tempted to play some orthodox or even unorthodox opening systems, and I'm not sure if it's because I am bored with 1.e4, or something even more distressing. How can 1.e4 ever become boring?

The experts say that one should stick with one opening repertoire for a long time before considering a switch. I've played 1.e4 for a year or more, and it's getting old.

Are you having fun with your opening repertoire? Suggestions? Thoughts?

I play the Italian: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4. What would be a fun variation of the Italian? I don't want to switch to another main line, like the Spanish: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5.

Follow it up with 2.Ke2. That should provide you with some fun.

You need to first prepare e4 with g4...

My first game without 1.e4. I opened with 1.d4, looking to play some kind of 1.d4 system, not a main line like the queen's gambit.

After 1.d4, my opponent replied with 1...e5. Is that a gambit opening? I've never seen it before.

The hardest part of playing against the Englud Gambit is keeping a straight face!

Are you serious?

1.d4 e5 really is an opening! It's been a long time since I started a game with 1.d4.

In the game I posted, Black made a mistake after pushing a second gambit pawn with ...fxe5 (??). He missed the threat, 4.Qh5+.

1.d4 e5 (Englund Gambit) 2.dxe5 f6 (Soller Gambit) 3.e4 fxe5?? 4.Qh5+ g6 5.Qxe5.

Bobby Fischer played 1.e4 his entire career at least 99% of the time as White.

I don't think one year is indicative of even being close to having the slightest clue about all the variations in the RL, open, closed, non-morphy much less all the variations in the CKD, FD, SD etc. 

nuff said!

I've played the Fried Liver Attack, and won several games that way, but when I play stronger players, they tend to know the little tricks and traps along the way.

I had someone surprise me once with the Traxler Counter Attack. It was an ICC game. Those guys over there know more book lines. Below is one example of how White can go wrong in the Traxler.

Just play something else for a while, and then later you will likely come back to it with some fresh ideas.  Play something else that interests you. 

Thanks for looking at my games.

I was playing e4 and d4 whenever possible for several months, but discovered that it’s hard to keep the e4-pawn safe with that set up.  Also, either my c3-knight or e1-rook would often get tied down to the defense of the e4-pawn, except for openings like the Scandinavian, where it gets exchanged after 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3

Playing c3 and d3 is a fairly new addition to my 1.e4 repertoire. It's seen in the Giuoco Pianissimo: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.c3 Nf6 5.d3. I decided to give it a try because I don’t need to worry about defending e4 with a piece, and my c3-knight can find better squares early on. Here's a sample game with that pawn structure. I like the flow and how the minor pieces move around the board.

Play active lines with 1.e4 and you wont get bored.

Yes. My tag is Musikamole. Here is my most recent game. G15. Against 1.d4, I like to play the Modern Benoni. 

Here is another game I played at ICC, opening with the Fried Liver Attack. 

ICC time stamps games, so when I viewed it, I could see how long I took on each move. A very nice feature for improving one's time management. With time stamping, I can tell you that this 15 0 game ended with checkmate at exactly 14:31 on my clock.

So, I used 29 seconds on the clock to win this game, which makes it look like I played slow, averaging 3 seconds per move. That's slow when all the moves are played from memory!    However, ICC time stamping shows that I played the first 8 moves in 20 seconds, or about 2 seconds per move, with move 9 played in 11 seconds for a simple mate in one. I must have had an interruption from one of my children, or maybe my wife!

Questions regarding the defense of e4: How is the e-pawn defended in a 1.e4 game?

The first problem I face is on move one. The e-pawn has no immediate defenders. Maybe that is why other guys about my playing strength or lower will open with 1.e3. Surprisingly, I see 1.e3 a lot. At first, I thought that the logic behind this move was to prepare d2-d4, but that's not what happens. I usually see an early queen and bishop attack, with White having no worries of losing his e-pawn, I guess. 

In this game today with the Black pieces, I wanted to test the waters with ideas from GM Nigel Davies instructional DVD: 1...e6, A Solid Repertoire Against 1.d4 and 1.e4.

Well, I was taken out of book on move one from White, with 1.e3. There was no way that I would follow 1.e3 with 1...e6.

I remember averaging a lot of time per move in this game, but without time stamping, I don't know at what points I took too much time. I'd like to have this information, for now, and a year from now.

Questions regarding the defense of e4: How is the e-pawn defended in a 1.e4 game?

Another way of thinking about the defense of e4 would be this - in how many lines is the e-pawn exchanged, requiring no concern for its defense? The Scandinavian is the first opening that comes to mind - 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3.

In how many lines can e4 and d4 be played, where White still has a good position after the e-pawn is put back in the box?

Here's a line to consider, where both e4 and d4 are played, placing two pawns in the center, opening diagonals for both bishops, and the e-pawn is exchanged. It's certainly different than what I would normally play in a two knights defense with White. What do you think? Would you play 4.d3, 4.Ng5, 4.d4, or 4.Nc3?

Try 1.f4.
I just read about it, it's a long discussion.
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/why-play-1-f4