Oh and for those who claim 1. e4 is not played at the elite, both World Champion Anand, and World number 1 Carlsen are mainly 1. e4 players. And for those who claim that 1. d4 is drawish, some of the best tacticians of today (Aronian, Mamedyarov, Wang Hao), and even the great Kasparov himself played 1. d4.
Is d4 better than e4
Sort:
ens20 wrote:
Some of you take this way too seriously. Both of them are quality moves (as are Nf3 & c4). I personally prefer e4, though I usually try switching.
And using statistics is meaningless, as games are not decided by white's first move, but rather by good moves (or lack of them) in the further stages of the game. Plus there are a lot of openings where white's first 2 moves are e4 & d4 (French, Caro-Kann, Pirc, Modern, etc), and frankly which one of them was played first does not influence the outcome of the game.
I'll just share this funny quote:
"These Hypermodern players who object to 1.e4 will play about 20 moves in which nothing happens; then the annotator will declare with a flourish, 'and now White threatens e4!'"
Emanuel Lasker
thats a pretty cool quote by lasker, man that old guy was pretty funny.
e4 is cool but d4 is my favourite-True d4 fans.
d4 is good but i love e4-true e4 fans.
d4 is shit!e4 is refuted!d4 is garbage!e4 loses by force!-Idiots
Maybe
a3!!!
BEST MOVE EVER!!!
I have have just proven ALL OF YOU WRONG! Muahahahah!!!
lmfao
Mandy711 wrote:
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.
After 20 moves, out of which the first 15 are theory. You're not making a strong case in favour of e4.
e4 rewards memorization much more than d4. The e4 opening seem really cool at first (that's why everybody starts with e4), then you just realize your opponent is in autopilot and your Najdorf/Winawer poisoned pawn will be decided by who spent more time memorizing lines.
And that's not all; if black is hellbent in getting a draw you'll have to deal with stuff like the Petroff or the Berlin or the Caro-Kann (if you don't do the Panov).
This stuff is more drawish than everything black can throw at you if you play d4.
plutonia wrote:
Mandy711 wrote:
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.
After 20 moves, out of which the first 15 are theory. You're not making a strong case in favour of e4.
e4 rewards memorization much more than d4. The e4 opening seem really cool at first (that's why everybody starts with e4), then you just realize your opponent is in autopilot and your Najdorf/Winawer poisoned pawn will be decided by who spent more time memorizing lines.
And that's not all; if black is hellbent in getting a draw you'll have to deal with stuff like the Petroff or the Berlin or the Caro-Kann (if you don't do the Panov).
This stuff is more drawish than everything black can throw at you if you play d4.
White is not forced to play the Open Sicilian, for example. He can opt for Moscow/Rossilimo stuff and enjoy a minimal edge, or at least a comfortable position. And it's not as if black can force a mass-exchange along the e-file with the Petroff. White can play for a more imbalanced position if he pleases, with the Nimzowitsch Attack or Boden-Kieseritsky Gambit for instance.
As for the Berlin endgame and other Ruy variations, white has little if anything, but there is no reason why either side cannot play for a win. Such positions are not about who knows the most theory, but who is the better chess player.
both e4 & d4 are equally good but in e4(open games) more tactics can be employed soon in the opening but where as in d4(closed games) only less tactics can be employed when compared to e4
but its left to the individuals choise we can play the one which suits us....
Jul 17, 2013
0
#91
karthik1109 wrote:
both e4 & d4 are equally good but in e4(open games) more tactics can be employed soon in the opening but where as in d4(closed games) only less tactics can be employed when compared to e4
but its left to the individuals choise we can play the one which suits us....
I play d4 all the time and I get tactics.
noleryer wrote:
e4 is better, fischer said it.
First, that's not an argument.
Second, he said precisely "best by test", which means that he preferred it and he scored better with it.
Third, mind you, in his 1972 WC match, he used 1.c4 with transpositions to various 1.d4 positions, in almost half the games he played as White.
Likhit1 wrote:
e4 is cool but d4 is my favourite-True d4 fans.
d4 is good but i love e4-true e4 fans.
d4 is shit!e4 is refuted!d4 is garbage!e4 loses by force!-Idiots
That's about all that had to be said.
d4 is best for white
e4 creates a better game
Irontiger wrote:
noleryer wrote:
e4 is better, fischer said it.
First, that's not an argument.
Second, he said precisely "best by test", which means that he preferred it and he scored better with it.
Third, mind you, in his 1972 WC match, he used 1.c4 with transpositions to various 1.d4 positions, in almost half the games he played as White.
i accepted it when Seirawan said it, but when you say i have to say you have absolutly no clue what he ment. Maybe he really ment to say its the very best. Did he ever elaborate it and say:" no its only best for me thats what i ment."
sharp.
It's human nature to choose the good, the better and the best.
If 1. e4 is the best, why does not everyone play it?
If 1. d4 is better, why does not everyone play it?
i wouldn't say 1.d4 = (is equal) to 1.e4. Since they are very different. The differences show in this thread, where ppl argue about 1.e4 and 1.d4.
So why do we argue about them? Because they bring success and failures. They bring success if they are played correctly. Even at 2700+ level, ppl still argue about them, let alone us below 2700+.
The arguments continue. I like it.
Jul 17, 2013
0
#98
bean_Fischer wrote:
It's human nature to choose the good, the better and the best.
If 1. e4 is the best, why does not everyone play it?
If 1. d4 is better, why does not everyone play it?
Nf3=good e4=better d4=best
i wouldn't say 1.d4 = (is equal) to 1.e4. Since they are very different. The differences show in this thread, where ppl argue about 1.e4 and 1.d4.
So why do we argue about them? Because they bring success and failures. They bring success if they are played correctly. Even at 2700+ level, ppl still argue about them, let alone us below 2700+. d4 is best at 1000+ level.
The arguments continue. I like it.
TetsuoShima wrote:
Irontiger wrote:
noleryer wrote:
e4 is better, fischer said it.
First, that's not an argument.
Second, he said precisely "best by test", which means that he preferred it and he scored better with it.
Third, mind you, in his 1972 WC match, he used 1.c4 with transpositions to various 1.d4 positions, in almost half the games he played as White.
i accepted it when Seirawan said it, but when you say i have to say you have absolutly no clue what he ment. Maybe he really ment to say its the very best. Did he ever elaborate it and say:" no its only best for me thats what i ment."
Fischer always speaks in absolutes. Like a Sith Lord.
If I try to imagine Fischer saying quietly "it's the best for me, but of course every player plays according to his/her own style and some might have better results with d4" I start giggling.
Some of you take this way too seriously. Both of them are quality moves (as are Nf3 & c4). I personally prefer e4, though I usually try switching.
And using statistics is meaningless, as games are not decided by white's first move, but rather by good moves (or lack of them) in the further stages of the game. Plus there are a lot of openings where white's first 2 moves are e4 & d4 (French, Caro-Kann, Pirc, Modern, etc), and frankly which one of them was played first does not influence the outcome of the game.
I'll just share this funny quote:
"These Hypermodern players who object to 1.e4 will play about 20 moves in which nothing happens; then the annotator will declare with a flourish, 'and now White threatens e4!'"
Emanuel Lasker