Why soo many people hate when white start with pawn d4 - Chess Forums - Page 2

speciak2137 · 2025-12-14T06:24:04-08:00

I talked with a lot of people and most of them just don't like when opponent is play d4 some of them are saying that this is just boring but not every opening is boring so why is that

Awesomedude2053

1 day ago

0

#21

darkunorthodox88 wrote:

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

That's true

DoYouLikeCurry

1 day ago

0

#22

darkunorthodox88 wrote:

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.

This is a much more elegant and better worded post that echoes what I was alluding to in mine - I actually play the Budapest very frequently (in faster time controls) for this very reason!

IM pfren

1 day ago

0

#23

darkunorthodox88 wrote:

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 )

There are several 100% reliable ways for Black to achieve open, fast-paced positions after 1.d4.

Like the Tarrasch, the Austrian defense (1.d4 d5 2.c4 c5), the ...e6 Benko, the QGA, etc.

NM darkunorthodox88

8 hrs ago

0

#24

pfren wrote:

darkunorthodox88 wrote:

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 )

There are several 100% reliable ways for Black to achieve open, fast-paced positions after 1.d4.

Like the Tarrasch, the Austrian defense (1.d4 d5 2.c4 c5), the ...e6 Benko, the QGA, etc.

the QGA only opens the game up somewhat. White can easily retain the sturdyness of his position. as for the austrian defense , after 2.nf3 , i dont see any obvious way to blow up the board (assuming the austrian is sound, to be honest i never studied it). as for the benko , thats already entering the slightly dubious territory (im not condemning it for it , but strictly from an eval perspective, black has to yield more for the nature of the game to change to his flavor)

Strayaningen

4 hrs ago

0

#25

Yeah I don't think I would describe the QGA as "opening up the game", like there are lines of it where if you ask "what options does Black have here to play aggressively and get some play" there really aren't any, hence its reputation as a drawing weapon at top level. I'm also not sure you can describe the Tarrasch as "100% reliable" when you can't play it against Nf3, this is sort of to the point, that most Black openings against d4 are not a single solution, and Black is at the mercy of White's choices in a way that happens less often in e4.

In the French for example, if you play Nc3 Black chooses the Classical or Winawer or Rubinstein, if you play Nd2 Black chooses Open or Closed or Rubinstein, and you have to turn to dubious sidelines or the Exchange to wrest control over the path the game takes. Or you play the Advance, but then you are very much playing into the structure Black intended. It is pretty difficult to name d4 openings that work this way. Usually White has control over at least some of the decision points and the structure while still being able to play for advantage.

IM pfren

8 min ago

0

#26

Strayaningen wrote:

I'm also not sure you can describe the Tarrasch as "100% reliable" when you can't play it against Nf3, this is sort of to the point, that most Black openings against d4 are not a single solution, and Black is at the mercy of White's choices in a way that happens less often in e4.

How so?

After 1.d4 d5, the move 2...c5 is very good against almost any second move by white (excluding 2.e4, 2.a3 and the stupid 2.b4). It's even good against 2.c4 (the so-called Austrian Defense, or Double Queen's Gambit, or Accelerated Tarrasch- it may also have other names which I don't know).