seemoreglass wrote:
nameno1had wrote:
according to houdini one.five it is .....
@ 20 plies, a depth that is possible for a human to look ahead to, d4 is better, but since humans cant play like engines, so it is a matter of preference.....
You are not analyzing deep enough. Try around 30 billion positions searched, it will stick with 1. e4
Not that this means anything, just sayin...
Fisher left an estate of appoxomately 2 Million$ (US). Crazy, yes. Homeless, no
I want to work hard and make lots of money so that one day I'm Fisher-homeless.
d4? Is that the same as shifting from Drive to 4 in a rainstorm?
One thing a white player needs to learn to over come is fear of the French. It really isn't as bad as it seems with strong opening knowledge, and/or a good grasp on playing that kind of position. Of course if you want to play e4 but you absolutely HATE the french simply play either 2.c4 (ANTI-CARO-KANN!) or 2. d4 ...e5 3.exd and you are playing a position fairly similar to a Queen's pawn opening.
As put by my long time FM mentor, it is all about the advantage of the first move. 1. e4 rapidly pushes the advantage of the first move, and 1. d4 gradually caries the advantage of the first move.
e4 allows two pieces to develop. d4 allows one piece to develop.
QED.
WAT?!!
d4 isn't better than e4, they're same quality. also same are c4 & Nf3.
no, d4 is much better because e4 runs into the najdorf and the sveshnikov and the st.george defense.
no, d4 is much better because e4 runs into the najdorf and the sveshnikov and the st.george defense.
you know - d4 runs into benko gambit, nimzo indian, QGD, QID, Benoni ?!
e4 > d4
d4 is better than e4 because patzers like blaming their openings for their failures. Later on, when they switch to d4 and still lose, come to the conclusion that 1.Nh3 is the best first move by far.
+1
Guys, let's do our best to not troll this forum. It has the potential to be a gem in public opinion about the differences between 1.d4, and 1. e4. For our brotheren starting out in chess this is a very hot topic.
My history in d4 and e4, ever since I was 1200 USCF (my starting rating at age 14) I have played 1.e4. Today I am 1900ish and I have rarely ever played anything other than 1. e4. Simply because it suits my style more and I feel like it has better chances for challenging my opponent right off the bat or at least sooner in the game than d4.
However I went through a long period of blitz where I always played 1.d4, and I actually achieved my best blitz ratings ever: 2200 on ICC, 1985 on Playchess.com and 1938 on chess.com. Just recently I have started playing e4 in blitz because I feel it is more condusive to my skill in OTB slow chess. Really you need to play thousands of blitz games with e4 and d4 on your own and find which you seem to score better with in the long run. That is, if blitz is your thing.
Here we have a difference of styles.
I feel that between reasonably competent players (say, 1800-2100 rating) an early collision tends to lead only to an early dissipation of tension, and the odds of a draw go up.
I prefer 1. Nf3 in order to avoid an early clash and defer the real struggle to the middle-game.
Okay, guys, find me an answer to 1.d4 and then i'll play it and bassically at the end of the opening i'll prove i have an advantage. now play your 1.e4 and you'll have a much harder time doing it when i answer it either with the sicilian svesh which is my normal or the najdorf/french to annoy you.
Okay, guys, find me an answer to 1.d4 and then i'll play it and bassically at the end of the opening i'll prove i have an advantage. now play your 1.e4 and you'll have a much harder time doing it when i answer it either with the sicilian svesh which is my normal or the najdorf/french to annoy you.
What if I answer you with the Alapin or the La Bourdonnais Variation?
......d4...... is a secret portal into the 4th dimension!?