If Magnus plays c4, why do most beginers not?

Beginners and Grandmasters are also two different things. Which was sort of my point.

Actually, there's no reason you can't play complex openings as a beginner. Go nuts. You'll lose lots of games, but you might learn a lot of stuff, too.

Who said that c4 was more complex than d4/e4. I have no intention of playing c4, im just wondering why not.

there goes the bunny's theory of c pawn odds.  now you tell us.

that is why we get experienced coaches instead of beginner coaches.

perhaps 1. e4 forces you to deal with things you need to learn first earlier.

1. c4 might be considered more complex because of all the transpositional possibilities.

It can stay as an English opening (after, for example, 1. ... e5), or transpose into various QP openings such as QGD Orthodox, Slav or Semi-Slav, Catalan, Nimzo- or other Indian formations (KID, QID, Bogo- etc)... there are even certain KP openings that it can transpose into (Caro-Kann Panov, for instance).

But like I said, as long as you don't mind losing games, it might offer learning opportunities.

Why is losing games associated with c4? With practice, you'll win/draw games!

sure. but at that point perhaps you're not really a beginner anymore.

The English is complicated and hard to understand as you need to understand many different structures and positions to play it. You need to know how to play both 1.d4ish lines, Reti lines, and more. The English is more strategic than tactical, and weaker players (most of chess.com) cannot fulfill the strategic demands of the English that very strong players (Carlsen, Naka, Kramnik, Anand, Duda, Marin, etc.) can

But doesn't the same apply to your similarly rated oponent?

+1

I have better results with the English than with 1.e4 against stronger players than me. However, I'm a weak player.

I think openings that propose clear plans are generally good for beginners (=weak players having some strategical knowledge, not people only knowing the rules). The English is one of them.

1.c4 involves a lot of theory, but 1.e4 is even worse for one playing the main lines. 

It's too explosive for the beginners to handle

after 1. c4 b6, white is already in trouble.

After 2.Nc3 Bb7 3.d4 e6 4.a3, white is perfectly safe IMO.

After 1. c4 b6, white is hardly in trouble.  He can play 2. Nf3, transposing to a Reti, or 2. d5, converting it to a Queen's pawn game, in both cases both with extra tempo.  However, after 2. d5 black can transpose to an English Defense with 2. ..e6, which is perfectly fine for black, and very sharp, so beginners might want to favor the Reti lines, which are more stable.

Black might trade his b7 bishop for the f3 knight, but this is usually unfavorable for black, especially if the white queen recaptures on f3 (which is a surprisingly secure square even when black still has a light-square bishop).

C4 is a great starting move but one has to be ready with a bomb suit since it's very explosive. 

It’s explosive unless you like the Botnnivik structure (I spelled it wrong, I think)

Okay, by beginner, I mean people like me that are about 700-1100 USCF

I mean, I play the French reguarly, so...

4 .... f5 has been a game changer in my neck of the woods.

You can play whatever opening you want, but this won't make you a better player- let alone playing something remotely reminiscent to Carlsen's style.