Why a4?

Why do people play 1.a4?

To try to get the rooks out generally.  A select few want to push the pawn into the enemies position.  Its a bad idea regardless.

meizerh

Most of the time a4 is pointless because it will typically have no impact on the game till the very end. That being said, one has to remember that White begins with an extra tempo, so he can afford to give it away by playing a4 if he wants. It makes it easier for Black to gain equality, but White is certainly no worse off. And it could have a psychological impact on the game.

My user is meLzerh, and I am asking this to the a4 players, but thanks for the support.

HoboKombat this was a bad idea for a thread.  Having said that, please know that I love you and am worried about you.

a4 means giving the initiative to black. Later in the game it could support the bisshop but it is easily avoided.
It is generally considered a bad opening, because it achieves nothing.
I never play a4 but I've done it some times to play the smiley variation:
a4, h4, b3, g3

ps. h4 in the first instance is better, after castling you have a move extra for a pawn rush towards the king.

Most of the people who do that move are beginners. It's the best to push your center pawns(d2 and e2) to e4 and d4. Your opponent wil have less space to move his own pieces and you will have more space!

I think it's just their style of playing.

ADK

I noticed in Game Explorer that masters opened 1.a4 in several dozen games, with White winning more than Black.

A lot of people prefer to play a4 before c4.

(Boooo -- I know, I know.)

maybe they play it as a waiting move just to see what you wanna do because they are either more comfortable counter attacking or at playing defence.who knows the method behind their madness.

you,d have to ask the people who play it. maybe they just fancy a change. i can,t think of any other reason.

little relevency bore. (not important, just go on with your normal game)

What???

It's odd that a large number of people who claim not to care about this subject took the time to post in it.  Perhaps you should re-evaluate how much you don't care?

Looking through some of the games available in the game explorer, it looks like it's either mostly psychological, or preparing Ra4.   Alternately, Ra3 can lead to the Meadow Hay Trap, which I assume is to gain initiative in a gambit-like opening that avoids opening theory.

A game by Preston Ware (for whom 1. a4 is named) shows Ware fianchettoing the queenside bishop after 2. b3, setting up a queenside pawn wedge supported by both bishops.

As mentione before, a4 can support a bishop on the b5 square.  Exchanging minor pieces on b5 with the a-pawn allows a rook to threaten a queenside castle.

Bill Wall posted a game a few months ago, using both the b2 fianchetto and the b5 bishop support: http://blog.chess.com/billwall/off-the-wall-chess---a-rare-ware-to-beware-if-you-dare

Any more than that, I can't really say.  The few a4 players will have to speak out, I suppose.

yeah, a4 can be psychologically crippling if you're not really a sturdy player. i played against my friend's dad who almost always starts with a4 (which is, btw, called Ware's Gambit, so someone must have mastered it...), and it psychologically crippled me because for some reason I thought rooks were THAT important, so I just assumed, "Oh no, I'm gonna be screwed in the end game," and thinking that throughout the whole game totally screwed me over. I wasn't really a great player at the time either. I had just gotten into chess like, 2 weeks before. 

Even though it did psychologically cripple me, he actually wasn't too bad at using it to his advantage. I was quite impressed. His son actually plays chess in tournaments, and the kid's already won two, so yeah, it wasn't just that I was a sucky player, it was that I was a sucky player AND that he knew how to use Ware's Gambit.

Well, that's my little experience with a player who loves using a4.

ohp. didn't know someone already stated that it was Ware's Gambit... haha, i feel like an ignoramous now...

And if 1.a3 wins against Karpov, then 1.a4 must be twice as good~!

I've met this move in a tournament before and thought it was Anderssens. I almost lost that one thanks to a time forfeit. As i remembered it , i thought it was a queenside  onslaught  but as the middle game progresses it was targeting the kingside whew!...I really got a head ache on that one.The Bishop on B2  was strong.

I'm playing against a guy who is using A4 at this very moment.  I think its great in getting a psychological edge on you opponent.  Your average player who is reasonably versed in opening theory, either thinks his opponent is either a beginner, who doesn't know what he is doing or, possibly a strong player who wants to try something new and different. 

In the games I'm playing now, I have just developed classically into the centre but this guy is tactically aware and It will be interesting to see how the games pan out.