Why soo many people hate when white start with pawn d4

Hmm. I am pretty sure that it is played about 40% of the time by masters.

d4 tends to lead to central pawn structures with a slower, more positional game. Also, since e4 tends to be the default at lower levels, most people who choose d4 at that level don't do it with the intent of going into main lines, they do it because they have some pet setup opening like the London, Colle or Stonewall Attack, all of which have the aim of attempting to destroy any possibility of Black having any fun playing the game.

Most likely they spent hours and hours of studying all the Sicilian lines and once their opponent plays 1. d4 they are angered that it was all a waste, same if they are a Caro player.

+1

Something to that affect...

Playing 1. d4 requires both players to be patient, develop slower and there are a lot of different ways to reply that they might not be ready for sure to studying the latest Sicilan or Spanish opening lines. White can play for advantage immediately in some lines like the Colle, Zuckertort and London System. He can go for some trap lines in the Queen's Gambit Accepted, play some wild lines in the King's Indian or try his hand against the Benoni Defense and Benko Gambit. Black has some fun options to play as well. He can play the Englund Gambit, go for a Dutch Defense, play a Semi-Slav Defense (with or without a later f5). Each opening has its own strategic ideas, opening theory and chances for chaos but again, many options are very slow and these days, more people would live to play like Hikaru or Magnus and less like Petrosian.

It's probably players who don't want to study another set of openings.

E4 leads to more tactical positions, while D4 is positional. D4 positions are also a lot easier to play as white than as black

I kind of hate 1. d4 because it mostly leads to closed positions which are pretty boring

@RonWeasleyMyGoat I agree with you

I just don't want them to play the london...

Because they foolishly think that the opening plays a role to the actual game nature & outcome.

Not to disagree too much with the IM who commented before me (yikes) but it’s mostly because there’s an idea that common d4 openings can be a lot more positional (your queens gambits etc) than e4 openings, which often move in more tactical directions. That said, it is not even remotely that simple: middlegames can completely change the understanding of the position, and you can also force tactical games in many positions anyway. For instance, I play a lot of Budapest gambit (particularly in faster time controls) which is the opposite of what many positional players want to see!

maybe because they cant play sicilian def idk

Probably because they study King's Pawn more than Queen's Pawn.

I mean: Just imagine studying all King's Pawn openings in the world and your opponent plays Queen's Pawn.

It can't be helped though, not everyone plays e4.

You think d4 is bad...wait until you face c4 or Nc3 or Nf3... Extra flexible moves played by professionals...

Cuz d4 is too positional. I like tactics.

If you play chess, you need to be able to respond to any opening move by White. If you have no response prepared to deal with anything other than 1. e4, you really aren't ready to do battle.

i think this question is not as trivial as people make it out to be.

the thing about 1.d4 that makes it more annoying is that black has less say in forcing the game to his desired structure than agaisnt 1.e4

lets say i play 1.e4 and my opponent replies with a classical french. The only real way white can really push for any substantial opening advantage is to accept blacks invitation and get into a closed position the black player is confortable navigating in. 1.e4 tends to play a lot like where white must yield the flavor of the position to black in exchange for their modest to decent opening advantage.

1.d4 is not quite so yielding. The few kind of lines that force white as much to retain their advantage while yielding to black the game's flavor tend to be a bit more dubious (benoni lines, budapest gambit, etc)., and furthermore, white can often do minor changes in move order to retain a nice edge while limiting blacks options. ( e.g say your opponent really likes the bogo-indian? i can delay c4 )

with 1.e4 , you often want a more tactical game even if slightly, but are usually fully willing to play positional closed games even if it lets you retain the edge, with 1.d4 you get a slower more positional game, where black doesnt really have any GOOD and guaranteed options to make it more tactical.

actually, i bet you a lot of the people that dont like facing 1.d4 also dont like 1.c4 and 1.nf3 either.