What's wrong with 1.b4?

I agree, and I would like to add that this is a good example for the general observation that MOST PEOPLE NEVER READ WHAT OTHERS HAVE CONTRIBUTED. In this case, fischerii did not read my several posts on 1.b4 e5.

They can laugh all they want.

Back in 2008, I was 2029.  I played 1.b4 in Dallas in all 4 of my White games at the 2008 US Open (Rounds 2, 4, 6, and 8).

My results?  3 1/2 out of 4, smashing an 1800 in round 2, Drawing a 2202 in round 4, destroying an 1865 in round 6, and blowing away a 2173 by achieving a completly winning minor piece ending where Black was forced to resign 10 to 15 moves later.

My Black results were also decent.  Won by forfeit round 1, so that didn't count.  Drew a 2300 player with a Scandinavian Round 3, blew away this jacka$$ named Jeffrey Haskel in round 7 in what was literally a Reversed French McCutcheon (reached thru the Colle vs Chigorin Defense, 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.e3 Bg4 4.Nbd2 e5 5.Bb5 e4 6.h3 Bd7 etc) with no gain of tempo for White as he did an early Nbd2, forcing him to play b3, Bb2, Bc3, and b4, where as Black, the pawn moves forward b7-b5 in 1 move.  I was low on time in the first time control, made my 40th move, and he literally flicked his king across the board with absolute refusal to sign the Monroi that both players are supposed to sign.  What was real funny was I reported they guy, saying that I have only 1 signature because my opponent was being a jerk for losing and wouldn't sign.  Guess who was handling the Monrois?  My stupid opponent's father of all people!  My 2 losses came against an Expert and a 2400, both Black against the English, in rounds 5 and 9.

1.b4 is NOT a bad move!

pfren I am afraid that your study of the b4 opening is not only embryonic itself, it is also non-existent.  On the GM level, I think you would find it very difficult if not impossible to find 3. Bxe5 as the normative choice.  I would love for you to enlighten me on a GM level game when a notable GM played 3.Bxe5 after 2.....Bxb4.  I think you need to go back to your chess studies.

Thank you ThrillerFan for the post on your smashing games with 1. b4 but frankly at the under 1800 tournament rating level I am afraid that anything is possible.  I am sure at that rating your opponents had no idea of the opening or how to respond.  On the GM level, they would have laughed under their breath, but courteously smiled at your "win".  No serious notable GM would play 1.B4 under tournament conditions giving up the center and certainly on GM level 3. Bxe5 is virtually non-exitent!!!

As for the 1800 and 1865, they probably didn't.  The 2173 played the line 1.b4 c6 2.Bb2 Qb6 3.a3 a5 4.c4 axb4 5.c5 Qc7 6.axb4 Rxa1 7.Bxa1 line pretty much following book thru the early to mid teens.  The 2202 played one of the static ...d5 lines and held his own.

And GMs have played it.  See Capablanca, Tartakower, etc.

On the 1. b4 opening where White plays 3. Bxe5 I think there is one win by Hans Larson vs Kosir.  Neither of these players were notable.  Larson's rating was around 1750.  Kosir's record was 4 wins AND 34 LOSES!!!!!   I think that pfren, ThrillerFan, Stolenidentity, and Schlecter55 need to go back to chess school.

I'm not sure this is proof of anything :p  But an expert having what must have been a 2300-2400 performance is a really good tournament, wow.

This definitely was one of my better tournaments, and shot me up from 2029 to 2080, but fell right back down afterwards with some bad results to follow.  My "stability point" (what I call the rating you can legitimately maintain at any given time) in 2008 was about 2020.  Today it's more like 2070 to 2080.  I should hit 2100 very soon.

Everyone will have spikes and valleys.  I first hit 2000 in August 2001, but didn't have a stability point of 2000 until about 3 or 4 years later.

you have no rating here, and you ignore all posts. Moreover, after 1.b4 e5, 2.Bb2 Bxb4 you claim that 3.Bxe5 is a bad move (in fact it is the best).

You even do not give an alternative for 3.Bex5.

Note, the sometimes by 'patzers' (=german for weak players) played 3.f4 ?! gives Black a clear advantage after 3....d6, 4.fxe5 dxe5, 5.Bxe5 Nf6. White is weak on the Kingside and down in development.

I challenge you to a Blitz match : 5 games, a 5 minutes.

It is not as bad as it seems....

fischerii is obviously mentally challenged as well as unable to use a database, as a quick search of mine turns up 6 GM games with 1.b4 e5 2.Bb2 Bxb4 3.Bxe5 (with GMs as White) in the last 15 years. No other 3rd move has been played at that level.

IM Yury Lapshun did try 3.f4 and won quickly against Raymond Kaufman in 1999 though Kaufman was just an Expert at the time. Kaufman didn't know that 3...exf4 doesn't work.

The principle hinderances on 1.B4 opening are that the natural d2 pawn must still be moved except by the time white moves it Black has formitable center to counter act it, not to mention the lose of tempo by moving b4.  Secondly the queen's knight, who natural placement is c3 is not displaced and usually ends up at d2.  To further complicate the position, white must somehow struggle to find a tempo to move the c pawn out of the way to allow spacial room for the development of other pieces.  All these are usually accomplished by the queen's pawn opening and the favorite choice of Gm's on tournament level.

This seems to assume white doesn't have other resources at his disposal. I am fairly sure he must. I've never played b4 before (hah). I think one person ever has used it against me.

Looks to me like White could potentially play this like an Evans gambit with 2.e4, chasing Black's bishop away with c3 and d4 and getting a developmental advantage and good center control for the wing pawn. Though it doesn't look as good as an Evans gambit. Perhaps White should do something else first. Maybe c3, then Nf3? Bring the Queen out earlier? Not sure.

pfren, if my analysis is accurate and it is, it only shows your lack of class to move to a personal attack by saying "no one gives a ..." about my comments rather than supporting your theory with facts.  Usually when someone's analysis fizzles out, and yours did!.. they move to personal comments.  I will recomment that NO SERIOUS GM IN HIGH LEVEL TOURNAMENT PLAY seriously considers 1.b4 much less 3.Bxe5.  

It is down a tempo, yes. Going back to the White side of the board, unless there is some way of taking advantage of the fact that you haven't committed a bishop to c4, this is worse than an Evans.

Occasionally and very rarely, gambits improve when they're down a tempo (if the tempo is weak and creates counterplay for the defender, for instance). From's Gambit vs the Staunton Gambit comes to mind. This probably isn't one of those cases.

I second that he's mentally challenged.  If you look just at the message right after yours alone, the following can be said:

1) Uhm, It's not the Bishop going to b4, it's the pawn.  Pawn moves don't use capital letters.  That's b4, NOT B4!

2) Here he is talking about d-pawn development, and finding the time for c4.  Uhm, hello?  Main line!  1.b4 e5 2.Bb2 Bxb4 3.Bxe5 Nf6 4.c4, yeah, that was really really really hard getting that c-pawn developed!  And what says you have to move the d-pawn?  After 1.b4 e5 2.Bb2 Bxb4 3.Bxe5 Nf6 4.c4 O-O 5.Nf3 Re8 6.e3 d5 7.cxd5 Nxd5, I see no d-pawn advancement, and actually, the d-pawn can't advance.  White will typically play Be2 (with or without a3 thrown in), and often will retreat the Bishop back to b2, whether forced to by ...Nc6 or not.  d-pawn stays home bro!

3) What says the Knight has to go to d2.  There are many lines where the Knight gets developed on c3, or even a3.

4) It's not about occupying the center for White.  The Sokolsky (or Polish or Orangutan or whatever other name you want to call it) is all about an early grabbing of the Queenside.  Often times, an early b5 is played (especially in 1...d5 lines), and b5 becomes White's strongpoint, and what it does is impedes Black's development of his Queenside pieces.  They tend to trip over each other.  Black looks to counter this "discomfort" with fighting for the center.  Let's not forget the old adage.  Counter an attack on the flank with an attack in the center!

lol

Classless society nowadays fischeriii! (If we are to be politically-correct:)

1.b3 is not a bad-move but cannot recommend b4.