What's wrong with 1.b4?

There is no such therad, becausd noone has quoted it so far. It is all based on rumours, and the wish to stay out. ZERO SOLIDARITY HERE !!!

I am out again.

And that's just b4. You should see what happens after!

irontiger is the only one who helped me, well thanks for the honorable mention for starters.. 

secondly i havent followed the entire posts, so i probably understood it wrong and dont even know who is right, and even if i knew i still made a mistake, its definetly bad behaviour to interfere in other peoples business. I should not have said anything to beginn with cause its not my thing and i wouldnt want other to interfere what im doing.

thx tetsuishima. Now when you have admitted you didnt read, the next step would be to read what I wrote, and take a stand .

Same for all others.

i looked at what you wrote but i couldnt see what pfren had wrote, because in his post that yours he wasnt even talking about you.

give me the page number of what angers you so much i might have a look at it, i still will refrain from interfering but now i would like to know more.

Tetsuishima, it started with #389 where I asked the COMMUNITY to give analysis and not just feelings.

In #392 Pfren said that analysis on demand is not available for free, even not for members. I answered that I would not have asked HIM, but all of us, and that without discussion, the foprum is senseless. He answered in #392 'put down your arse, and study'.

This was by far not the only occasion he jumped on me.

Later i said that that 1.b4 is not without influence on the center, because it controls c5, and hinders Nb8 to go to c6.

Then Pfren answered in #442, 'I am cross-eyed, but not that much', see also #446.

Later he sharpened this by saying in #463 that some people would believe 'white gets some advantage', it was obvious he meant me, although i have never said that. 

In #492 he called some people who did not agree with him (I did always agree, except with this little thing about b4 having an eye on the center),

'ignorant wood-pushers'.

In #502 he said that I am 'not worth a free answer', and not even 'an analysis'. Except I would pay him.

Later , because he was short of (chess) arguments he mocked that I did not give my real name on chess com (meanwhile i am without name, and after the new experience, I am not willing to change this).

He asked me to leave, in arude way, in #578.

After I came back, he stepped again on me saying that I would be clueless about chess.

I think it is now clear.

I dont expect that many people take a stand (because some friends here have exposed themselves in an ugly way too much already). But

I should at least be respected, because i did not harass anybody, and helped this forum with some analysis.

In a perfect world, everyone would be respected and friendly on internet forums. On the other hand, good luck with that!

schlechter55, I agree with your chess-related arguments, but I think continuing this discussion and taking it as seriously as you have been, as well as taking pfren's comments to heart and demanding to be defended, is pretty childish. This is the internet, people don't have to defend you, and you make it less appealing by constantly whining about people picking on you.

Why do you think you should be respected? You made a thread with a rule about no personal attacks and only got a few posts in before attacking pfren, which was pretty ironic. Your analysis was only about 2% of your total posts in this thread, the rest were complaining that nobody commented on your analysis. I would consider this trolling at this point too.

pfren - I wasn't saying that DarthMusashi gave better answers THAN you, but that he gave better answers to me than he did TO you. When you commented on his post he gave a useless response which you correctly tore to pieces, while when I commented on his response to you and original post, he gave a well-thought-out and constructive response that showed he actually read and understood what I was saying.

All you did when a finger was showing you the moon, was saying "jee, your finger is fat!".

You should clearly be respected for that- no doubt.

When was the last post that actually mentioned a variation in this thread?

you are right, falcogrine, but isnt it fair to ask to stop the mocking against my person, because i have shown proofs  that I was wronged ?

I would ask everone to stop this madness, but that has already been asked and SOME people don't seem to be able to stop trolling.

I can't believe my eyes... You guys are still busy fighting!

The thread's author should block some members/posts from this thread. I like how the original question was not whether b4 is good or bad, but just asking about tactical traps that occured. One other solution would be to start a new thread.

You always say: it's a woman but... There is a lot to say about men too, I guess 

ok, I will just ignore from now on those people who troll, and come back to chess. But remember, I was punished for doing that.

They haven't decided on whether they will argue about 1.b4's playability or if it gives White an advantage so they'll just argue whatever comes to mind. I don't think we have many good threads that get to 600 posts anyway.

That is not the way to do it... Just saying...

Forgive and forget.

 Heyyyyy! Leave those silly guys to fight and challenge me for a game!

One tactical trap in a 1.b4 opening is that if Black really, really isn't paying attention, he can lose a rook.

Here is an example:

http://www.chess.com/livechess/game?id=497873072

In this game, I mixed up my move order and played Nc6 before Nf6.