why d4 is better than e4

lol, when i clicked to this thread i knew it would bullshit

But it just got to the capslock key...

a spike in draw rates, ummm, i think i read somewhere that it's mainly due to the rise in popularity of the petroff (russian) defence and the berlin ruy lopez (nicknamed the berlin wall), two very drawish openings.

As a fairly long-time Schliemann addict, I have to reluctantly agree with pfren about the unavoidably drawish lines that White can engineer if he so desires.  That said, I find that, practically speaking, White will often try for "more" unless there's a big rating disparity or what not.

Its always fun to watch someone with no verifiable chess credentials argue with those who have them .  I think next time I go to the doctor I will argue with him about medicine ! 

Sadly, I bet that is very common due to internet diagnostics sites and stuff.

 Much like the global warming denialists.

Argh! I have been playing e4 for awhile...how hard is it to switch?

(a life-ban on the first person who says "its easy, just move the queen pawn up two squares")

Actually, I get the feeling patients are sometimes better informed, or at least more objective, about certain aspects of drug prescriptions than doctors, at least in America.  But I digress... :)

As if it needed to be said, there's a difference between drawish and boring.

Ruy Lopez Marshall. Drawish? Yes. Boring? No

Ruy Lopez Berlin. Drawish? Not if you know what you're doing. Boring? No

Exchane Slav. Drawish? Yes. Boring? Yes

Sicilian Najdorf. Drawish? No. Boring? No

etc.

I wasnt even referring to me but to IM Pfren .  While the NM title may be ridiculous to you ( and maybe other chess titles as well ? )  I assure you its not ridiculous to those who have earned it and those who are trying to earn it . 

@ uhohspaghettio:

Apparently you haven't played 1.d4 that much.

To put it simply: 1.e4 is so popular in low level simply because when people learn chess it is the easiest way for someone teaching them how to play in the opening to justify the battle for the center. For the obvious reasons.

Then these players start to develop, and by being humans they simply build on their past experiences and games so that they actually learn faster. This justifies that they are focusing more on 1.e4 and are probably not even willing to change and try 1.d4. (How many of us can actually devote to chess as much time as we want?) Hence, they have the illusion that 1.d4 is a "positional" move and live happily in their own fantasy world. Well, apart from Sicilian, I think that 1.e4 is the positional move. But whatever. You are convinced anyway.

The fact of the matter is that with 1.d4 if White wants to push Black to a super aggressive line, he can do so in a much bigger percentage of openings compared to 1.e4.

Now go on, read the autobiography of Tal, and try to convince him that he was a positional player. lol

That, and end of story for me too.

e4 is easy to deal with. d4 puts plack in dilemmas where white keeps pressure on d5 and closes down blacks position. As hessmaster said, e4 is refuted. d4 is not, and will not be. The only reason e4 is at the top of the popularity list is because black plays nadjorf or dragon, and then white crushes.

Opinions being stated as fact. I'm afraid these sort of things are inescapable :(

Do you actually know what refuted means? And just because the najdorf scores well with black against e4 you come here to say that it refutes e4 lmao...even without giving any lines. And when you said that the french refuted e4, do you still think that? I could play 3.exd5 against the french and e4 wouldn't be refuted lol.

I've seen this before.. Some of this advice like "doing nothing" will be taken in by many people, and they'll end up saying it's Obama's fault.

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/explorer?pid=14380&side=white

1. d4 is better than 1. e4 because the Queen's Gambit is better than the King's Gambit.

@ricardo_morro: exactly!

@ajian: I feel very comfortable with the dragon and rarely get crushed because of it