Is d4 better than e4

I like e4

Are you kidding? No, they are not equal, there is a huge gap between them. That's why this topic exists.

Can't you see when you make your first move 1. e4 or 1.d4 or etc, it will determine the game? Except Black response with a passive move.

e.q. 1. d4 Nf6. Immediately black prevents white to make 2. e4.

Likewise 1.e4 c5. immediately challenging white d4 square. White reponse could be the usual 2. Nf3 or d3.

French: 1. e4 e6.

but 1. d4 e6. White could answer 2. d5.

The pawn structure is usually not the same for 1. e4 and 1. d4.

So, I can't say they are equal, more often they are not.

Still 1.Nf3, moving a pawn first is too commital imo.

I am talking about the value of a opening not the pawn structure that the opening creates.... e4 is as good as d4!!!

Is not 1.e4 better (generally) the more prepared/experienced one is?  Whereas 1.d4 allows for more "system-oriented" and general-concept type play?

Does that make sense?

I like e4 because the game pace is faster. After 20 moves, I knew already if I'm winning or losing. I find d4 games slower.

If you like open game then you play e4, if you like closed game then you play d4... Both moves make an attempt to control the center and open a diagonal for a bishop... Of course each move has its own game plan, pawn structure but both have the same value.

The only little difference i can see after 1 e4 is the white queen has more mobility or more squares to go to compare to 1 d4. But how often do you move your queen so early in a game?

I just post mine so that you will elaborate a bit about what you mean by "equal". Take it easy pal.

Equal means same value, different but same chess value...

e4 is better because its best by test and because and d4 is a mistake ;).

Whats wrong with being a Fischer maniac ?  

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/game-analysis/e4-vs-d4-analysis

Karjakin plays 1.e4 exclusively, and he is not the only one. 1.e4 is played at all levels, in all kinds of games; centaur, correspondence, OTB, blitz etc.

Compare Fischer at the board to modern GMs.

According to chess tempo 4:3 (e4:d4) in games between 2700s. The notion of 1.e4 being somehow significantly inferior to any other first move is absurd.

Really depends where you ae winning

what does the ratio tell about the inherent strenght of e4 compared to d4? it just tells you the history of what  move was more played.

and why do you cite chesstempo?? since when are they are an instituition of chess knowledge??

Just checking guys, are we all still on planet Earth ?