simple to capture the centre.
Why play 1.e4 or 1.d4?
Sort:
this is stonewall!!!!
Jun 25, 2015
0
#4
keshav_s_delhi wrote:
this is stonewall!!!!
No, Post 2 is not a Stonewall. It actually isn't anything yet. A lot depends on what he does.
If White plays Nf3 without advancing the f-pawn to f4, it's a Colle System
If White plays f4 before playing the Knight out, it's a Stonewall Attack.
ThrillerFan wrote:
keshav_s_delhi wrote:
this is stonewall!!!!
No, Post 2 is not a Stonewall. It actually isn't anything yet. A lot depends on what he does.
If White plays Nf3 without advancing the f-pawn to f4, it's a Colle System
If White plays f4 before playing the Knight out, it's a Stonewall Attack.
I just ignored him.
Well, what do you think ThrillerFan? What are the ideas behind 1.e4 and 1.d4
Jun 25, 2015
0
#6
thechessplaya5 wrote:
ThrillerFan wrote:
keshav_s_delhi wrote:
this is stonewall!!!!
No, Post 2 is not a Stonewall. It actually isn't anything yet. A lot depends on what he does.
If White plays Nf3 without advancing the f-pawn to f4, it's a Colle System
If White plays f4 before playing the Knight out, it's a Stonewall Attack.
I just ignored him.
Well, what do you think ThrillerFan? What are the ideas behind 1.e4 and 1.d4
Both are for central control. White should not play 2.e3 after 1.d4 d5. He should play 2.c4!
1.d4 controls c5 and e5. 1.e4 controls d5 and f5. 1.a4 controls b5. So the idea is to play moves that control central squares, not squares close to the edge.
Black often responds to 1.e4 with 1...e5 or 1...c5 as they attack the d4-square, not allowing White a big center with both central pawn moves.
Black often responds to 1.d4 with 1...d5, 1...Nf6, or 1...f5, all of which control e4 and again prevent White from dominating the center.
Even slightly less popular moves that still control a central square are also played at the GM Level, like the English (1.c4), which controls the d5 square, and 1.Nf3, which controls the e5 square.
Until you are about 1800 Over the Board, focus on opening concepts, not opening theory, as most of your opponents will go out of book early anyway, so just keep in mind that you are trying to fight for control of major central squares early on, and remember, you control squares that your pieces or pawns attack, not the squares they occupy! Pushing 1.e4 gives White some control over the d5 and f5 squares, but does nothing for the e4 square itself. For example, after 1...Nf6 (Alekhine's Defense), Black is already threatening to take the pawn on e4, so White should advance the pawn with 2.e5. It relinquishes control of the d5 square, which is where the Knight now goes, but he gains a major space advantage long term.
I play 1 e4 almost always, ftw.
I've tried the 1 Nf3 kings Indian attack if I don't feel aggressive.
Also I've played 1 Nh3 or Na3 when I'm been feeling weird.
Never play 1 d4 because it just don't look right.
ThrillerFan wrote:
thechessplaya5 wrote:
ThrillerFan wrote:
keshav_s_delhi wrote:
this is stonewall!!!!
No, Post 2 is not a Stonewall. It actually isn't anything yet. A lot depends on what he does.
If White plays Nf3 without advancing the f-pawn to f4, it's a Colle System
If White plays f4 before playing the Knight out, it's a Stonewall Attack.
I just ignored him.
Well, what do you think ThrillerFan? What are the ideas behind 1.e4 and 1.d4
Both are for central control. White should not play 2.e3 after 1.d4 d5. He should play 2.c4!
1.d4 controls c5 and e5. 1.e4 controls d5 and f5. 1.a4 controls b5. So the idea is to play moves that control central squares, not squares close to the edge.
Black often responds to 1.e4 with 1...e5 or 1...c5 as they attack the d4-square, not allowing White a big center with both central pawn moves.
Black often responds to 1.d4 with 1...d5, 1...Nf6, or 1...f5, all of which control e4 and again prevent White from dominating the center.
Even slightly less popular moves that still control a central square are also played at the GM Level, like the English (1.c4), which controls the d5 square, and 1.Nf3, which controls the e5 square.
Until you are about 1800 Over the Board, focus on opening concepts, not opening theory, as most of your opponents will go out of book early anyway, so just keep in mind that you are trying to fight for control of major central squares early on, and remember, you control squares that your pieces or pawns attack, not the squares they occupy! Pushing 1.e4 gives White some control over the d5 and f5 squares, but does nothing for the e4 square itself. For example, after 1...Nf6 (Alekhine's Defense), Black is already threatening to take the pawn on e4, so White should advance the pawn with 2.e5. It relinquishes control of the d5 square, which is where the Knight now goes, but he gains a major space advantage long term.
I think that opening theories are important to aim for consistency in the openings. I am closing in on 1600 (I have only started out a year before) and I feel that in order to achieve a playable middle game, some opening knowledge is important. The general opening concepts do not always apply to all openings, especially to hyper-modern openings.
Your answer does not suffice the needs of my question. Instead of telling what squares 1.d4/1.e4 control, you could have underlined by taking the most common 1.e4 and 1.d4 openings, tell me their key ideas and middle-game planning tips. You can take Ruy from 1.e4 and QGD from 1.d4 as example.
Gouryella wrote:
I play 1 e4 almost always, ftw.
I've tried the 1 Nf3 kings Indian attack if I don't feel aggressive.
Also I've played 1 Nh3 or Na3 when I'm been feeling weird.
Never play 1 d4 because it just don't look right.
1.d4 does not "look" right? It looks the most beautiful and solid to me. Moreover, I know the key ideas and can exploit tactics more in 1.d4 openings.
Jun 25, 2015
0
#10
thechessplaya5 wrote:
ThrillerFan wrote:
thechessplaya5 wrote:
ThrillerFan wrote:
keshav_s_delhi wrote:
this is stonewall!!!!
No, Post 2 is not a Stonewall. It actually isn't anything yet. A lot depends on what he does.
If White plays Nf3 without advancing the f-pawn to f4, it's a Colle System
If White plays f4 before playing the Knight out, it's a Stonewall Attack.
I just ignored him.
Well, what do you think ThrillerFan? What are the ideas behind 1.e4 and 1.d4
Both are for central control. White should not play 2.e3 after 1.d4 d5. He should play 2.c4!
1.d4 controls c5 and e5. 1.e4 controls d5 and f5. 1.a4 controls b5. So the idea is to play moves that control central squares, not squares close to the edge.
Black often responds to 1.e4 with 1...e5 or 1...c5 as they attack the d4-square, not allowing White a big center with both central pawn moves.
Black often responds to 1.d4 with 1...d5, 1...Nf6, or 1...f5, all of which control e4 and again prevent White from dominating the center.
Even slightly less popular moves that still control a central square are also played at the GM Level, like the English (1.c4), which controls the d5 square, and 1.Nf3, which controls the e5 square.
Until you are about 1800 Over the Board, focus on opening concepts, not opening theory, as most of your opponents will go out of book early anyway, so just keep in mind that you are trying to fight for control of major central squares early on, and remember, you control squares that your pieces or pawns attack, not the squares they occupy! Pushing 1.e4 gives White some control over the d5 and f5 squares, but does nothing for the e4 square itself. For example, after 1...Nf6 (Alekhine's Defense), Black is already threatening to take the pawn on e4, so White should advance the pawn with 2.e5. It relinquishes control of the d5 square, which is where the Knight now goes, but he gains a major space advantage long term.
I think that opening theories are important to aim for consistency in the openings. I am closing in on 1600 (I have only started out a year before) and I feel that in order to achieve a playable middle game, some opening knowledge is important. The general opening concepts do not always apply to all openings, especially to hyper-modern openings.
Your answer does not suffice the needs of my question. Instead of telling what squares 1.d4/1.e4 control, you could have underlined by taking the most common 1.e4 and 1.d4 openings, tell me their key ideas and middle-game planning tips. You can take Ruy from 1.e4 and QGD from 1.d4 as example.
Look, don't judge my response and start critiquing what I could have said. You're not a writing professor grading a term paper, and I know one hell of a lot more than you do.
1600? I'd smack you silly. I'm 2104! I know a lot more than you do, and have played almost 2400 tournament games over the board of standard time controls (Not Blitz or Quick). I know what I'm talking about. But if you want to knock your superiors, enjoy staying at that lousy 1600 level!
Also, 1600s shouldn't be worrying about hypermodern openings. Leave that for your 1800+ players. Stick with classical principles. You should be playing openings like the Ruy Lopez and Queen's Gambit as both White and Black, openings that follow fundamentals pretty much to the letter!
If you want something specifc, be more specific with your questions. Don't just make some stupid blanket statement with a blanket-type question and then knock the response because it wasn't pin point exact of what you were looking for. You want exact? Go hire a GM at $100 an hour to tutor you!
play 1. c4.
It leads to a closed, offbeat, and strategical game.
E4 can lead to an open game with very active pieces and quick development in the opening. D4 can to lead to a closed game allowing each side more time to develop. However, it all depends on what your opponent plays in reply, because a closed game can open up and an open game under certain conditions can develop into a closed game, depending on the activity in the center. Also there are semi-opened games which take on the character of both. There is much more to be said about this subject and one way to get a truly satisfying answer is study the repertoire and commentary of the world champions.
c4 is more interesting though
1 d4 don't look right to me chessplaya, maybe I'm a bit biased by what Fischer used to say!
It looks good to you, so you could well excel with it! As for me, no chance :)
ThrillerFan wrote:
thechessplaya5 wrote:
ThrillerFan wrote:
thechessplaya5 wrote:
ThrillerFan wrote:
keshav_s_delhi wrote:
this is stonewall!!!!
No, Post 2 is not a Stonewall. It actually isn't anything yet. A lot depends on what he does.
If White plays Nf3 without advancing the f-pawn to f4, it's a Colle System
If White plays f4 before playing the Knight out, it's a Stonewall Attack.
I just ignored him.
Well, what do you think ThrillerFan? What are the ideas behind 1.e4 and 1.d4
Both are for central control. White should not play 2.e3 after 1.d4 d5. He should play 2.c4!
1.d4 controls c5 and e5. 1.e4 controls d5 and f5. 1.a4 controls b5. So the idea is to play moves that control central squares, not squares close to the edge.
Black often responds to 1.e4 with 1...e5 or 1...c5 as they attack the d4-square, not allowing White a big center with both central pawn moves.
Black often responds to 1.d4 with 1...d5, 1...Nf6, or 1...f5, all of which control e4 and again prevent White from dominating the center.
Even slightly less popular moves that still control a central square are also played at the GM Level, like the English (1.c4), which controls the d5 square, and 1.Nf3, which controls the e5 square.
Until you are about 1800 Over the Board, focus on opening concepts, not opening theory, as most of your opponents will go out of book early anyway, so just keep in mind that you are trying to fight for control of major central squares early on, and remember, you control squares that your pieces or pawns attack, not the squares they occupy! Pushing 1.e4 gives White some control over the d5 and f5 squares, but does nothing for the e4 square itself. For example, after 1...Nf6 (Alekhine's Defense), Black is already threatening to take the pawn on e4, so White should advance the pawn with 2.e5. It relinquishes control of the d5 square, which is where the Knight now goes, but he gains a major space advantage long term.
I think that opening theories are important to aim for consistency in the openings. I am closing in on 1600 (I have only started out a year before) and I feel that in order to achieve a playable middle game, some opening knowledge is important. The general opening concepts do not always apply to all openings, especially to hyper-modern openings.
Your answer does not suffice the needs of my question. Instead of telling what squares 1.d4/1.e4 control, you could have underlined by taking the most common 1.e4 and 1.d4 openings, tell me their key ideas and middle-game planning tips. You can take Ruy from 1.e4 and QGD from 1.d4 as example.
Look, don't judge my response and start critiquing what I could have said. You're not a writing professor grading a term paper, and I know one hell of a lot more than you do.
1600? I'd smack you silly. I'm 2104! I know a lot more than you do, and have played almost 2400 tournament games over the board of standard time controls (Not Blitz or Quick). I know what I'm talking about. But if you want to knock your superiors, enjoy staying at that lousy 1600 level!
Also, 1600s shouldn't be worrying about hypermodern openings. Leave that for your 1800+ players. Stick with classical principles. You should be playing openings like the Ruy Lopez and Queen's Gambit as both White and Black, openings that follow fundamentals pretty much to the letter!
If you want something specifc, be more specific with your questions. Don't just make some stupid blanket statement with a blanket-type question and then knock the response because it wasn't pin point exact of what you were looking for. You want exact? Go hire a GM at $100 an hour to tutor you!
I am just a hobby player and I do not need to hire any GM because I do not want to become the World Champion. Unlike you, whose dream is to become a GM, I treat chess just like a hobby. SO SHUT YOUR MOUTH and go play OTB tourneys.
What I mean to ask is what are the opening principles in reference to these to opening moves. Please mind that it is not a thread for comparison. It is just to acquire knowledge about the theory behind each one of those moves.