Hey Birdbrain... you are saying that Bird's a good opening (mmmmhhh) so I think I can say that From's gambit is a good line against Bird's. Not going to give lines.
Why play 1. f4?
Sort:
I mean, if you want to know the answer to your question "why not to play 1.f4?" then that question has no answer. Just what happens with other questions like "why not to play 1.b3?" or "why not to play 1.e4?" or even "why not to play 1.d4?". Discussing about an opening is just nonsense. If you like Bird's opening then study it and play it. And when we meet I'll play the From's gambit coz I think it's a good answer. But hey I'll never play 1.f4 coz it doesn't give white anything. I prefer to study 1.e4...
I like f4 too! it's a good line if you feel like attacking. it's good to combine it with nf3 and a queen bishop fiancetto.
Sep 8, 2008
0
#25
skeptical_moves wrote:
for all you 1.f4 haters out there, good look up some of the GM games that actually use the bird opening... it's quite impressive when used correctly
why its not the best.theirs e5 against it it is kinda good for black
Why play 1.f4?
1. To avoid the attack-defence on the well-researched 1.e4
2. To explore other lines of hypermodern openings
3. To confuse the opponent as 1.f4 is rarely played (only valid if black doesn't use outside help such as softwares, databases, books - once the game has started).
There IS a reason why nearly no GM's play it at the highest level.
Because they know there are better choices for their first move.
That being said I think 1. f4 is not nearly as bad as some people would think. It just requires a bit of understanding and a good dose of intestinal fortitude.
Sep 8, 2008
0
#28
I don't play it because it looks really dangerous. I don't have a strong understanding of the opening. I've played black against it and managed to equalize against a stronger opponent. I lost because my endgame is inferior. I don't think this says anything about the validity of the opening but I'm not that good. It concerns me that I was able to equalize against a superior opponent.
Anthony
chesslife wrote:
skeptical_moves wrote:
for all you 1.f4 haters out there, good look up some of the GM games that actually use the bird opening... it's quite impressive when used correctly why its not the best.theirs e5 against it it is kinda good for black
there's many different ways to respond to e5 and i would probably just translate into a king's gambit... so it's not like e5 dominates against f4 which is what everyone is making it sound like!
Okay, in the fxe5 From Gambit Lines, I do not think Black has anything. The g5 from is just a couple of cheap tricks and then losing a pawn for hardly any compensation. The Nf6 From is less explored, but by all means playable. It hasn't been put into test much, so I think you will have to play energetically to gain any sort of compensaton. And even if White wants to avoid your From's Gambit lines, he still has the KG. You better have a nice lasting KG defense if you do not want to get pummeled. So in reality, you are playing a possibly inferior opening that requires a bunch of theory. And you won't face it that much either.
The Nf6 line is the most playable, although since it contains the least # of cheap tricks amatuers are less likely to study it in favor of its trappy but unsound counterpart, the g5 line.
I've studied this line with USCF expert Darius Mohamed, who has won OTB games against several GM's and IM's at the Marshall Chess Club in NYC and whom I consider an expert in this line.
We have studied the g5 line until end of analysis and its his opinion that the g5 line is crap but the Nf6 line is playable although he feels black gains dubious compensation for 2 center pawns.
The King's Gambit is probably less sound than both of them. How many times does the King's Gambit appear in top level chess nowadays? Not much, because GM's can easily gain a small advantage with proper play. Even Spassky didn't play it very much correct?
Exiledcanuck, so far I have 3 in my new tourney, and I am the low man at 1778 I think! It ought to be some fun!
Anyone who thinks it is bad, fine, that is fine, but you may think something is bad without actually getting involved with it. 1. f4 is a commital move that discloses one of White's ideas from the beginning - kingside intentions.
But then again, remember that the English was considered inferior for many years since it allowed Black to play ...e5 easily. However, White players finally figured out that the pawn advance was not detrimental to their play. This also goes back to consider that even in the days of Capablanca, the Sicilian was considered an inferior opening - take that in your pipe and smoke on it for a while! All you Sicilian players, consider that less than 100 years ago, your opening was looked down upon by one of the greatest chess minds who EVER lived. So when GMs today look down on 1. f4, don't take their analysis too greatly. I recall recently that Topalov lost to Aronian in a blindfold match where Aronian played 1. f4! And even the great Fischer understood the value of the Queenside Fianchetto Bird lines - look at Fischer-Mecking (albeit he began with 1.b3 and slowly converted into Bird's Opening lines).
1. f4 is better than anyone thinks, and White can at least pull out equality, if not advantage in the opening. In any Sicilian opening, the advantage is normally decided with a cloud of obscure moves - that is why GMs like the Sicilian - they like double-edged openings. The truth is, the Bird can go either way, doubled edged tactical battles, such as in certain lines of the From's, or positional battles as well.
Anyone who downgrades this line doesn't have much experience with it, I think I can vouch for that. Even my new buddy Soyelpako (I apologize if I misspelled) chose not to play 1...e5 after looking at the lines - White does fine.
The best (possibly) is to play 1...d5 with standard Dutch lines. In my opinion.
Come join the BirdBrain Invitational No. 2 if you would like a challenge!
Sep 9, 2008
0
#34
I haven't personally tried the bird once yet, but I will. It takes your opponent away from playing his pet sicilian, king's pawn or gruenfeld lines and if he has disregarded the bird entirely, chances are he/she wont know what they're in for. Why not!
unfortunately though 1.f4 is more often won by black than white in international games.
You may be right to say that 1. d4 is a strong move, but it is also true to say that there are many valid defenses that defeat 1. d4. A 1. d4 player must learn many defenses, and I believe that 1. d4 is a good opening. The main idea behind this forum is not to prove that 1. f4 is the best opening, but that it is a valid opening, one not to be disrepected. I think anyone who argues against 1. f4 should prove their argument in terms of practical lines of defense.
I know that 1. f4 internationally does not win as many games as 1. e4 or 1. d4, but it does have a valid number of wins and draws, enough to be considered. And if you find yourself steering to lines that have high percentages, you may find yourself deceived. As a matter of fact, if I do a bit of research, I am sure I can find a crazy percentage behind a line you wouldn't touch, simply because of whatever reason. Another thing to consider behind 1. e4 is that it has been played way more than 1. f4, so there is more theory to contend with. The same goes with 1. d4. If you like to memorize theory, then stick with the moves you love. But if you like to get a bit out of book quickly, then 1. f4 might not be a bad choice for you. It doesn't lose the game immediately - White still has plenty of winning chances.
reversed dutch defense?
Yes, it is a reversed Dutch Defense, but the extra tempo allows White to create possibilities that are more difficult in the Dutch, such as playing 2. b3 after 1.f4 (Bird's original idea), which can be very useful.
If someone wants to supply me with a line from a GM that makes 1. f4 so terrible to play, I want them to explain it with GM thinking. Most people are not GMs, so they don't think like a GM thinks anyway. And GM's most of the time don't understand the nuances of 1. f4 anyway. I asked Nigel Short about 1. f4, and he quickly dismissed it (through my myspace account). I know GMs don't think highly of it, but why don't YOU give it a second thought, if not to play for yourself, then to understand so you at least know how to defend against it. I want to raise a bit of awareness of this opening on this site - that is my idea. Your move! :-)
I like this topic. A lot better than the last forum where mandelshtam and Reb had an ongoing argument. I think the Bird can be compared to the English except that it controls e5 and not d5. Also, there are some good lines where White can play a b4 and gain space on the queenside.
You've evidently put a lot of work into it so for you it will be a strong opening but there are better openings to master for people who haven't started on this one. I wouldn't say it's worthwhile learning one of the weaker openings unless you're a mid-level player who plays OTB, since you're likely to come up against players who don't know the theory. With CC and an opening database, you aren't.