If you had to pick ONE b4 or f4 !?

by that logic then the sicilian is subpar

exactly

Why would I waste time playing the bongcloud? But I don’t mind bird game.

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

1 b4 because it's tricky and less potentially drawish.

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.

The King's Gambit is known to be drawish. I mean, you could do the same thing and ask "since when is 1. b4 ...c5 drawish?" Or 1. b4 ...g6, which I'm sure must be playable.

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.

Yes sorry I knew I'd got the name wrong. Forkbeard County Gambol.

@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.

Add to them GM Mihail Marin, who used the Bird in all the games he played as white in a couple of tournaments. He has also made a Modern Chess course on the opening, which is pretty good (with some minor flaws).