why d4 is better than e4

This is what I know concerning this subject .... one of the greatest minds in the history of chess was asked why he played e4 so regularly .... his response was " When I play e4, I win ! " That man was Bobby Fisher.

The dragon is refuted? Please tell me how, it happens that i play it.

Oh really? Then you should tell the man not wasting his time...

http://www.amazon.com/Chess-Developments-Sicilian-David-Vigorito/dp/1857446755

320 thickly printed pages, on just selected variations of the Yugoslav attack. A former monograph on the Soltis variation alone goes over 400 pages.

A single inaccuracy by any side, and he/she can pack and go home.

I greatly appreciate your role as a dedicated chess.com entertainer, but PLEASE do mind your jokes being a tad more believable...

e4 is better. d4 is easier. The d-pawn is well defended by the queen, whereas the e-pawn is sent out all alone, doing the work of a martyr.  It's a no brainer as to which one is easier.

Why, 1.e4 could be considered a gambit opening. 

Oh, I see. An "offbeat opening" which was played:

- 23 times in the last 3 years by thw world's #1 ELO, minimum opponent rating 2684, with a +2 score.

-13 times by the current #4 on FIDE ratings.

-520 times, in total, by players of ELO 2700+ (as Black only) within those 3 years.

So, this is what you call an "offbeat opening"... oh well.

I can bet that your main opening weapon is the Buzumbura Gambit.

Google has never heard of the Buzumbura Gambit. If google is not aware of it, then it definitely qualifies as well off the beaten path.

I can't find it, and I own many books on opening theory. Please post it in algebraic notation. I like the sound of it. Thank you.

@ Musikamole: The opening moves of the Buzumbura Gambit vary according to the day of the week the game is played.

This is a common element of all the "non-offbeat" openings.

If  dragon players have their collective fingers crossed that their opponents play the Yugoslav Attack, then what is the line that you claim practically plays itself?

First you say the dragon is refuted then you offer evidence that shows at master level Black wins over 30% and White wins a little over 40%.  If White masters are  winning less than 50% , then how does this support your assertion that the opening has been refuted.  30% sounds pretty good if Black is in a must win situation.  If the opening has been refuted White should be winning about 95% at the master and above level.

You state that super GMs only play the dragon for suprise value.  If Kasparov  only played it once against Anand in a championship match, you might make an argument; but how can you claim that he played it only for surprise value, when he plays it a second time in the same match?  Radjabov plays the Dragon far too often for anyone to be surprised by it.

You gotta be kidding me.  Days of the week? Well, if it is like an Opening System, like the King's Indian Attack, or the Colle, where move order is not important, then please post the "system moves". Thanks.

I have a thick book on Unorthodox Openings by Eric Schiller. I'll give that book a try.

"White hardly has to know any book" You didn't just say that...And how does a refuted opening score so well?

The Buzumbura Gambit not in Unorthodox Openings by Eric Schiller. I don't own Schiller's book on gambits.

... why I am wasting my time, reading posts on "refution" of mainline openings... Hey, idiots, when we have Quantum Computers 1000 years from now, we will perhaps know something along those lines, but the 'SOLUTION' will still be beyone the human brain.

Do you know that there are more possible chess games than No.of atoms in the visible part of Universe?

If you are thinking about 'refuting' 1.e4 or 1.d4, try first to win 100 games out of 100 against Houdini 1.5 in any theoretically equal endgame (with, e.g., five pawns each). It will be a much easier task. 

I'm sure Bobby Fischer doesn't have any trouble finding excuses to turn in his grave, the mad bastard.

Dear chess.com readers,

Great news.  I've discovered a clear-cut refutation of the Sicilian Dragon!  Unfortunately I don't quite have space to write it down in this comment box, but you can look forward to reading about it in my upcoming book, "Chess, The Universe, and Everything".

Alternatively, I can explain the main details of my startling discovery through online lessons at the generous rate of $200/hour - only 50 cents per move, plus you get to hear my voice over skype.  For an additional $50 I will also sing "Swing Low, Sweet Chariot".

Sincerely,

- GargleBlaster

For just a measly $ 600 I can also teach you the definitive refutation of the Buzumbura Gambit.

I can't believe it. I am here again, posting. 

OK, if you can't stand that, then I can sing you "Pretty Vacant" for free.

You're weird.

Well played Well played

 I take the umbrage out every tuesday morning, its one of my honey do's.