Is C4 a good opening

Statistically it does as well as e4 or d4.

Again some overgeneralisation here.

The highest rated player in the world uses it ocassionally so of course is good to play/learn this opening:

I was merely stating a fact, I didn't draw any conclusions from it.

1. c4 is just as good as 1.e4 or 1. d4. In fact there is no other opening move that is better than 1. c4.

I am stating this as a 99.9% sure fact!

Now for some relatively low rated players--it is a positional opening and might not be best for them. 

To play 1. c4 you must have a lot of skill at positional chess.

There is no better first move than 1. c4. 

However if you do not have the positional skill to play 1. c4 then better not play it. However do not "blame" 1.c4 as not as good as 1. e4 or 1. d4 just because you may not have the skills needed to play 1. c4.

The easiest first move to play for the novice is 1. e4

With 1.c4 I play the following lines:

1.c4 g6 2.h4
1.c4 c5 2.b4 cxb4 3.d4 have not played this yet
1.c4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 2.e3 Liedmann Gambit
1.c4 e5 2.e3 Nf6 (or Nc6) 3.f4 exf4 4.Nf3 Kahiko Hula Gambit
1.c4 Nf6 2.g4 English Weidenhagen Gambit
1.c4 Nf6 2.e4 Omega Achilles Gambit

The last 4 lines listed, I do have articles on them at Chessville
in my column called "The Search for Dragons and Mythical Chess
Openings" where I discuss strange new openings and unknown
gambits.

Best Regards
DarthMusashi

I'm not that into the English.

You might find me foolish for it, but I was merely commenting on your word choice. "Certainly not" and "commital" may act as a deterrents to beginners looking to branch out in their openings. I mean, why try 1. c4 if it is "certainly not" as good or "committal" in comparison to 1. e4 and 1. d4? At the very least in pre-2200 elo, 1. c4 is equal to 1. d4 and 1. e4 in a practical sense, which is kinda all that matters in this context.

@AnthonyCG: Sure, a --complete-- beginner will probably not do well with the english opening, but all beginners will (ideally at least) become intermediate players. And honestly, if they're stumped by move two, then they obviously haven't put any work into learning the opening. Views such as yours when taken to extremes will definitely lead to stunted growth imo.

Yes, 1.c4 is a very good opening for players of all levels. It is the third most popular first-move for white, and many of todays top grandmasters use it. Even the uber-aggresive ones like Nakamura.

Personally, I have been opening with c4 for about 25 years now. Ever since my H.S. coach told me to quit screwing around, pick one opening and stick with it. Guess you could call me a fan. 

Also, as most variations are less forcing, 1.c4 requires much less studying than either 1.e4 or 1d4. Which is what i like most. I'm not sure about you, but i dont wanna spend my midnights and weekends memorizing endless variations. I would rather just develope my pices, castle, and play some chess.

Oddly enough, when using the black pieces 1.c4 seems to give me more trouble than 1.d4 or 1.e4. My friends ask me to explain this, I cannot.

The nice thing about the English Opening is that it leads to more closed or semi-closed positions. This makes the game longer, so there will be more "chess" in the chess game. You dont get the wholesale-exchanges that sometimes occur in more open positions.

I am certainly lower rated than a lot of other people (working towards 1500 on here currently), but I only play the English as my opening and I enjoy it.

People talk about the amount of theory you have to learn because it can turn into other openings easily. You can also avoid a lot of transposition from sticking with c4 g3 Bg2 for just about anything they do (obviously if black plays 1...d5 then capture and play Nc3 after he takes with the queen). It stops a lot of transpositions and cuts down on the theory. Is there a chance you'd have slightly less advantage when doing this then if you had transposed? Sure. Will that slight change matter if you aren't playing at an IM or GM level? Probably not.

Also people seem to forget that if you play e4 or d4 you have to learn just as much theory because the opponent gets to choose which opening you go into and there are a lot of options.

I also find that with c4 at the levels I'm playing it keeps my opponent from playing memorized lines and now it is you thinking vs them. I do run into an occasional opponent who plays instantly in the opening and has clearly studied responses to the English but overall it isn't the case.

I also view it as an opening that will grow with me as I improve. I can start going into the transpositions which will start me learning other openings as I rise to the level where I'm ready for that.

I think I might have played against it once here on chess.com in the span of a lot of games so I don't get to practice the other side of it very often.

I don't play the English but I respect it as I find it difficult to defend against.  d5 seems to give white a tempo in a few moves, and e6 blocks in his queen's bishop. 

English opening can lead to a various opening lines. It can come to Queens Gambit, or a kings Indian etc. :)

Anthony I thoroughly disagree.

First, showing one game where Carlsen played against the English and won does not a point make. Especially since he has played the English himself as white before.

Second, there are more options in reply to e6 than to simply play d4 that are sound (proven by GM analysis).

Lastly, the first basic premise of the English is that you ARE putting pressure on the center from the edge and is setting up a situation where if black tries to immediately take the whole center white is set to exchange a flank pawn for a center pawn. The whole base of the opening is heavily controlling the white center squares. So to say you are neglecting the center and going against basic opening theory is just plain wrong (not to mention on top of that white is typically  planning to fianchetto the bishop, move out the knight and castle so he is developing pieces quickly and castling quickly, all part of the basic opening principles).

You also are trying to act like the English will simply lose with comments like simply hack away, and other random nonsense as if it is an unsound opening. It is a perfectly sound opening and has extremely similar win/tie/loss rates as e4 and d4. Go ahead and look on chess.com's game explorer for first moves.

You can prefer a different opening, but spouting random false statements is not the best way to make an arguement.

You are misreading things in my posts. I am not playing c4 to avoid anything at all. I said you can avoid transposition and be in a fine position. That's why I said you can play c4 g3 bg2 to almost any response to c4 and you will be ok, especially at our levels.

I also was pointing out that I think it is a bit misleading for people to say beginners should avoid c4 because of all of the theory involved when playing e4 or d4 can run into so many vastly different openings by black that there is just as much to learn.

I also fully disagree with playing c4 at our level resulting in working twice as hard. There is simply no basis for that statement, and in fact many of my easiest games were from playing c4.

The biggest reason I would recommend c4 to other beginners and lower ranked players is you avoid what people have memorized at our levels. When playing e4 or d4 you run into players who have memorized certain opening lines even 10 moves or more deep at our rating levels. In contrast very few seem to have memorized anything in the English so it can be a match of calculation and skill instead of memorization as I haven't yet taken the time to memorize many opening varations to any real depth.

I've been playing chess for around 6 months now (pushed pieces around as a kid without ever learning anything beyond the basic rules. Typically moved the knights around a ton with no regard to other things as it was fun) and am seeing constant steady improvement. I only say that as proof enough to other beginners that playing c4 will not destroy you or make you work harder or anything else. I've found playing c4 as white and playing the Caro-Kann vs e4 and the KID against d4 has worked well for me up to this point.

With the black pieces, there many good choices to pick from when facing 1.c4. Without knowing how strong you are or what your preferences are, it is hard to make a single recommendation though. One idea for players who like playing the white side of the Sicilian Dragon is to just do the same thing with black (minus a tempo of course.)

1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.g3 d5 and voila. A 1.e4 player should feel right at home.

Otherwise, many players just do whatever it is they do against 1.d4, with slightly altered move order. For example, to get a QGD, 1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 d5. Of course, white may choose here to sidestep the QGA with 3.cxd4 exd5 4.d4.

Dutch player?  1.c4 f5 and you'll be there soon enough.

Or for the King's Indian, just play the King's Indian. You'll either get it, or a better version of it. Same with the Old-Indian.

Gruenfeld players often miss their opportunity to play this defence. 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 g6 3.e4 when its probably heading into a KID. But the Gruenfeld can still be reached if Black plays d5 on move 2 instead of 3. This works because there is already a knight on c3 to trade off.

After 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 e6, white often plays 3.d4. but may instead choose to sidestep the Nimzo-Indian by playing 3.e4. A pet line of Kasparov.

Slav player can try 1.c4 c6, hoping for 2.Nc3 d5 or 2.d4 d5. But be warned, white may insted play 2.e4 when after 2...d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.d4, you have arrived at a Panov Caro-Kann.

Other defences to 1.d4, such as the Benoni, Benko, Chigorin, Albin, or Budapest, may not be reachable after 1.c4 unfortunatly. Unless white really wants to face them, that is.

That's all I got. Hope it was helpful.

@varelse1 2Nc3 has gone out of fashion at this point. It has been said to be better to play g3 Bg2 and often Nf3 first. It avoids the bishop trade for the knight doubling the c pawns.

@baatti The reversed Sicilian is the main reply to c4, however I don't think any second move by black refutes c4 at all, especially Bb4. I am assuming you are refering to if white plays Nc3 on their second move (which isn't the standard move order anymore) because there'd be no point to the move after 2. g3. That definetly doesn't refute anything as it was the standard 2nd move by both white and black for a long time with the eventual exchange to double the c pawns. White still has a fine position and is certainly playing for a win.

Many game results contradict that easily. If it really favored black the game results would show this, yet the results follow similar percentages to e4 and d4 openings.

Here's one that transposed into what we're talking about, Kasparov seemed to have no problems with those two pawn moves first http://www.chess.com/games/view.html?id=1135790

Another: http://www.chess.com/games/view.html?id=517880

Karpov: http://www.chess.com/games/view.html?id=464752

Carlsen vs Anand Rapid: http://www.chess.com/games/view.html?id=4420788

http://www.chess.com/games/view.html?id=791668

The fact is you can go on and on and on with links to high level players who have played c4 and g3 in the first two moves and found it to be solid. It clearly doesn't favor black but instead results in a game where both sides can play to win like all solid openings.

I only watched the first bit of that but he is showing a fairly obscure english there.

Here's one for you http://chessopenings.com/english+opening/

Well isn't you claiming the English is a draw the same as ponz claiming it's as good as e4 and d4? We have no way of really knowing. And that's a good thing.

Not surprisingly I agree with pfren. d3 was not a good move choice there and that was the problem. Playing the line badly and then using that as a reason the opening is not good is not a great argument.

My first thought as I clicked through your game was to actually play 4 e3 instead of Nc3. I would have liked that position more, in fact I think I've played that exact sequence once or twice on chess.com.