If you had to pick ONE b4 or f4 !?

Bro I can't challenge you my daily rating is too low 😂

I would pick b4

1-0

Sorry man but I need to be an advocate from the white side

Yup 

I don't have any mega-databases, but someone who does could look up the stats for Master & GM games that employed the opening lines being discussed here.  That would give much more reliable evidence than any one-off games by lower-rated players.

Yes, After 1.e4 e5 2.f4 (or 1.f4 e5 2.e4), the antidote which made me abandon the King's Gambit was 2...d5!, Falkbeer's Counter-Gambit

I've tried the KG but I didn't like it

1.b4 is known as the Orangutan and was popularized in the 80's, I would definitley do b4 over f4, as f4 is not good simply because you are exposing your king's diagnol way to early, and unlike the King Gambit in which you have tons of theory based on different variations, nobody plays the bird in top teir or intermediate levels because it is drawish or just gives losing positions straight off the bat. However the thing about it was that the Bird in mine eyesight was never an opening I took seriously, it just seemed like one of those playful openings to catch your opponent off guard, but not an opening you would want to go for a win. 

But 1.b4 is different as it was always known as an opening to go for wins, at least in its prime days, and though it is not commonly played now, it is a good opening because it gives more chances for white, however in the bird it just seems peculiar and it seems you are the one who is fighting for equality rather than black, and in that case it seems weird as white always has a slight advantage in the opening, but in the bird it seems like the opposite, in which seems unorthodoxed and gives to much for the black pieces from the start. I like to equate the Bird as White's verision of the Scandinavian as it seems players have to work extra hard from the opening just to be in the place they want to be. And if they don't get there or lose too many tempi because of unorthodoxed play, then they have a chance to get an early knockout or simply a worse position.

Moreover b4 can coorelate to many systems of the past such as the Andersson opening, or the Nimzowiztch-Larsen Attack when you fianchetto the dark squared bishop and try to control the center squares from distance rather than from immediate central control, in which is a unique and well thought out positions that were initially made from positional Master's such as Nimzowiztch and Andersson(although Andersson was credited for attacking, in which he was a brilliant attacker; but still he had great positional knowledge as most attackers, do and in order to make an opening you have to have that knowledge, and such was the case with Anderrsson.) 

So it seems like b4 is good and better than 1.f4. Now I in the right hands 1.f4 would be awesome and could even be devestating. However in my hands 1.b4 would be a great opening and it proves as there is much to like from it from what was previously said.

1. b4 all the way!

I have played this move (known variously as the Sokolsky, the Orangutan, and the Polish) for a long time and my blitz rating is over 2100. If you're not convinced, look at my blitz history.

"nobody plays the Bird in top level"

GM Henrik Danielsen (modern)

GM Bent Larsen (1980-1990s)

GM Aron Nimzowitch (early 1900s)

GM Emanuel Lasker (what)

Also: Magnus Carlsen played the Bird's 4 times... and won four times.

https://www.chessonly.com/bird-opening/#:~:text=Bird's%20opening%20starts%20with%201,Hikaru%20Nakamura%2C%20MVL%2C%20Nepomniatchtchi.

@SNUDOO 

All of those people that you've named are 30 years or older. Do you see anyone that plays it now, successfully for more than 4 times, besides Magnus Carlsen? 

Probably not you know why? Because nobody plays it... It is nothing to argue about it is just the truth, the same truth that the Oragutan is not played in top teir either, however it is a better opening In my opinion. But also if you want to get technical look at the statistics, and all the people who say that b4 is better. It was popular in the 80's and is popularized by the majority over the bird for a reason.

There is no reason to take offense, that is just the reality, just like the same reality that d4 is slightly statistically better than e4. Do you think people that play e4 believe d4 is better, probably not, of course they are going to disagree. But regardless there is no reason to take offense, it is just the reality of what it is, in this situation. But my question is What do you want me to do about it? I can't just make people like the Bird or make it a better opening. Besides I realize that openings is a matter of preference, but it is a difference from preference and thinking that one opening is better than another when simply it is not because of obvious reasons and not so obvious reasons. 

Some reasons could be because it doesn't give people enough to win and it is drawish, some could be because it just seems like an inferior opening in average Master's hand, or some say it is not good to play because it doesn't suite their play. There are many reasons, but above all these reasons mentioned, all are valid.

It mildly amusing how IM pfren comes in and says the bird is a good opening. And then Snudoo lists like 5 GMs an/or world champions that play the bird. But then a bunch of 1200s go ThE BiRD is BaaD it WeAKEns The KING! as if they know better than an internation master. 

No, they aren't IM's, which means they aren't qualified to call one opening better than another when the clearly have no experience. I wasn't referring to the people saying that they don't play it. I was referring to the people saying that it is inferior to 1. b4, when they have no place in saying that.

@TinkleDink

Any chess forumer will tell you that understanding is understanding, regardless of rating or initial impressions, whether IM or not.

What you are saying is not accurate, and also with you talking about this in this topic. How do you feel about the conversation? Do you think the Bird is good? Go ahead and play it, if you think is a good opening or if it your preference, but don't talk if you have no meaning behind what you say in the terms of other players.

So simply regardless of how high or low a person is in rating, it doesn't matter as people know what they know, you act as if because someone isn't an IM, another player is not intellegient or can't pick up some things about the game. Like who are you to tell anyone of us? You are the same and even if you were a higher level, there is this thng called Respect... 

Plus it is just not a good all-around, it was an opening of preference, from the person who made the opening in which who was called Henry Bird, it was good for him because he was good with it, but for other players that don't play the Bird, then no of course it is a weakning and inferior opening, as people don't know how to play it and for the few that do play it, it is for reasons that are preference and/or because they are just good with it naturally or just like it.(But most are not, so why would they agree with it, there are so many other variations and openings people play and it just not what most players play...)

Many people are not good with an opening like the Bird, it just wasn't mean to be mainlined for an opening, it wasn't suppose to be like e4 or d4 or c4 or even Nf3, it is called an Other opening for a reason. And though such that c4 and Nf3 are other openings, they are not as bad as 1.f4 for the majority of players.

This is why people say the Orangutan is better if you want the real truth, because nobody plays the Bird, except for the people that are exceptionally better or like the opening, otherwise who plays it?

I mean there are 5 GM's who play this opening or such, however even so that is based on what their styles are, not because it is a good opening, because many people would think it is not great to put it simply. And I do think it does give a disadvantage as there are many ways to break through, such can be said the same with the Dragon variation in the Sicilian, but also there are still some Dragon Specialists out there, but it is not a popularized opening in Master play. The same is for the Bird, in exception for the selected few that were mentioned, but who else in master play?

So @TinkleDink when you say these things it makes me wonder as what are you talking about, this discussion is not amusing because the facts and understanding of this topic speaks clearly. Moreover it doesn't make sense how you put this exactly because this has nothing to do with conversation about how the Orangutan or Bird is better or worse, the crazy thing is, is the fact that you didn't even respond to the question from what I've seen.

Regardless, please mind your business and don't come at nobody like that, just say what you need to say and move on.

I don't understand, sorry

The ape vs the Bird. Who will win? Theres your answer

Bird, cuz birb poops on everything

@TeacherofPain, you clearly have absolutely no idea what on earth you are talking about.

If you think that you don't need to be a strong IM or higher to decide whether an opening is superior to another, then you are wrong. The fish in this thread have absolutely no right to say that the Sokolskys is better than the Birds, unless they are quoting a titled player. Neither do I for that matter.

This is a thread asking an opening "preference", which is the only opinion that the beginners here are qualified to give. I have nothing against people who say that they prefer the Sokolskys over the Bird. But i will not take it when they think they know better than an IM and multiple GMs.