What's wrong with 1.b4?

I think it is not about (tactical) traps. Rather positional play, unbalanced positions, where the one who understands the strategic needs better, will win.

I do not agree that 1.b4 would not set problems for black.

It is also reasonable from first glance: the b- pawn keeps an eye on the center, since he does not allow Black to play c5 and Nc6.

Aliekhine understood this when he meant, the only disadvantage of it is that Black has not decided yet how to setup his pieces, and he can adapt to the early b4. 

Well, I am cross-eyed, but not that much.

you carefully omitted the second half of my sentence, Pfren. Dont you think this is unethic ?

Maybe a4 also keeps a look at the center. It's preventing b5 and b5 keeps an eye to the center.

To all those who deliberately distort or belittle my threads in this forum (Smyslovfan and mykingdomforanos etc.):

The numbers of some my threads where I have put variants (some of them are longer than all others here, except of course complete games) plus explanations of plans, and few games, are

#  6, 10, 92, 178, 187.

Note, Pfren has confirmed my opinion that 1.... e5 is the 'most resepectable' in his thread '  #183.

(Except: he said in his second variant with 1....e5, 2....d6, that f5 would be perhaps best, while i am of the opinion that a Kings-Indian setup , with Nf6 , g6 and Bg7 is very good. He also said that the idea f5 is a matter of taste.)

All of what i wrote is not a superficial engine analysis, but it is in books.

Further, nobody has given CHESS arguments why my variants would be bad (except fischeriii, lol).

------------------------

So far about reliability of what I said here.

---------------------------

What I mean is, if anybody wants to criticize, he should always give logical reasons (analysis and evaluations, based on the position).

Under that logic, 1.Na3 also keeps an eye on the center: it attacks the central square c4. Same goes for 1.a4 after 1...h5 2.a5 h4 3.a6 g5 4.ab7 g4 5.a8=B- the a8 bishop controls a lot of central squares.

1.b4 is called "flank opening" for a reason. Or maybe not?

Queening would cover lots of squares too, but 1.b4 influences future central play a bit more than a4 and Na3.

...and a good bit less than the four popular first moves.

Then 1.c3 must be better than all of them lol...

mocking and mocking. 1.a4 attacks b5 which is not a square of the (extended) center. 1. Na3 attacks c4 : a square that can be controlled easier by  white pieces (b3, d3, e3(4), and Bf1 'attacks' it...) than by black pieces (it is closer to the white king), Na3 ignores also that this knight has a more effective future on c3 and d2 (attacking more squares than on a3, and some of these squares are central squares).

I think some people here do not want to discuss seriously, or should i think that a person who claims (btw, where is a proof ?) that he is IM in OTB does not know all this ?

Calling a GM of Mr Damjanovic's status  "clueless" whist questioning his expertise, immediately renders your opinion worthless.

Would he put a picture of himself on his avatar if he was impersonating an IM?

A picture can be someone else, lol.

I am not doubting he is an IM, but he should stop mocking that I should 'put my arse down to learn' and that he would give me chess advice, but for payment.

I suspect he does it because he does not like that someone else is also giving substancial arguments.

And others here should stop using 'authority proofs', or saying that i should stop talking because i am not famous.

what makes you think its his picture?

1. the thread you referred to (you omitted it) did not contain an analysis, because it did not have variants.

2. You are unable to prove that my  comment on the white strategy is wrong, because it was proven in thousands of master games, OTB and correspondence. 

I thought everybody used their own pictures.

well, the guy on the photo is not pretty, so I think it is Pfren himself.

(fake photos are either very beautiful, or very odd).

you know there was a guy in germany a so called flood expert. Not only wasnt he an expert, the title didnt even exist. He worked for the goverment and was nothing but a blender and no politician noticed it.

I think Chess.com doing a good job and yes Pfren most likely is an IM but you never know, weirder things happened in life.

thats what i ment... Yes and he showed decent chess knowledge, i was just saying you never know

Conclusively, the only thing that is wrong with 1.b4 is that there are people which seriously believe that white might get some advantage with it.

If you have alzheimer, chess is a good idea to slow down the disease.