What are the 4 "winning" first moves assuming perfect play?

Based on my analysis I belive that any first move for white is a draw except the Kadas (1.h4), the Grob (1.g4) and the Amar (1.Nh3)

There is a person in my OTB club that plays 1. Na3 followed by 2. Nh3, and he is currently dominating in a field with multiple NMs. Openings have very little to do with the result of the game even at the master level.

I know that in the form of checkers played in England and the United States, there was a famous match where the same game, move-for-move, was played several times - and so randomized openings were brought in.

I was not, however, aware that Chess had been so well analyzed that it was known whether White's advantage was sufficient to force a win - let alone that it was known exactly which opening moves preserved that advantage.

I suspect "winning" according to some unmentioned pedagogue... 

"Any other move is losing assuming perfect play."

Highly doubtful and definitely unproven.

But yes, almost certainly the strongest four first moves white can play are 1.e4, 1.d4, 1.c4 and 1.Nf3 (not necessarily in that order.)

Honorable mention to 1.g3.

A guy in talk chess analysed the initial positon for more than 6 months non-stop with stockfish, depth more than 70 , ? trillion nodes and SF didnt see a forced win for white!

Chess is 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999................................99999999999999%  draw in perfect play.  

Fortunately enough he did not pass to us the electricity bill.

Unless you're caught in an opening trap! I've won plenty of games with those.

I was made curious by the premise of this thread to see, at least, if anyone had every made a serious claim, even if mistaken, that White wins as long as he makes a certain first move.

Thus, I learned about Weaver W. Adams, who claimed that White would win after 1. e4, provided he followed up that move with careful opening play that maintained control over the board.

Hans Berliner later wrote a book, "The System", in which he praised Adams' basic principles, but instead advocated starting with 1. d4 and using the same technique. He claimed to have found refutations for most, but not all, of the common defences against 1. d4.

It may also be noted that Bobby Fischer, who played 1. e4 almost exclusively, has at times been noted as using opening moves that came from Adams' work.

The rest of moves are not losing. There's no opening that forces white to win with perfect play, you either draw or lose if you make a stupid opening.

I belive that all the moves are drawing except Nh3, h4, g4 and I'm not sure about a5, Na3 and f3.

I seriously doubt that there are ANY "winning" moves on move 1. It usually takes at least two errors (or one outright blunder) to depart so far from a balanced position that your game is objectively lost.

Top 7 most agressive chess openings :  

yea

definitely.

scary. just scary.

You cannot prove that there are losing moves as well. Moreover, you cannot not even prove that a Queen odds is winning by force.

Yes, you can proove that a queen odd is losing by looking at fishtest data, more than 1.3 billions of stockfish games were done in 5 years. There will be less than 1 in million game where SF did see a forced win with +10.00 in real game ( not custum made puzzles).

If there is 95% confidence interval, it is statistically proven. If there is 99.99% confidence interval, it is proven. Chess engines in 10 years ago doesnt understand basic KQ vs KP ( rook pawn in 7 ranks etc). But Stockfish in todays is ways intellient than older days, thanks to those 1.3 billion test games.

"If there is 99.99% confidence interval, it is proven."

As long as there is .01% "unproven" something is not proven.