D4 is better than E4 and C4 and its also whatever works best for you

yes but often white does play bad lines look at my game history with the Sicilian there's so many people doing the bowdler and stuff the best line in the Sicilian are najdorf and closed Sicilian which bassicklly never lets the game go in those sicilians its blacks choice to allow attacking ideas

I've always said D4 is the best move. That's always my first move. It's too easy for black to get a draw against E4 if black plays E6 the French Defense.

I mean Ive never seen the French defense because I don't play E4 and play Sicilian against E4 so Ive never seen a french defense but I think you might have a point

At engine level e4 is refuted primarily bc of e5 (Berlin) and some Sicilians as well. I'm aware of fewer draws with d4 openings and transpositions to the general d4, c4, and Nf3 setups. It honestly makes sense, bc despite the attacks being more slowly developed, the emphasis on center control and pawn structure make it prime.

Alphazero was an animal with the Catalan.

Your post does not consist of complete sentences but it wouldn't make a difference if it did - there are numerous anti-sicilians far better than the Bowdler / Smith Morra. Black has a choice of main line sicilian, but white has most of the choice all the way up until the main line. But black having the choice of main line is what makes the sicilian formidable and very different from almost every other line in 1. e4... it takes black alot of work to get to the point of reliably dealing with the anti-sicilians, though. And if white knows his theory... the open sicilians remain very good for white. The more common ones (i.e. Najdorf) are easier for white to deal with since white gets alot more practice against those - main advantage black has is the breadth of sicilian theory and the burden this puts onto white. Hence, at levels below high masters (and certainly at your level), black should leverage that advantage and not play something super-common like the Najdorf.

Every antisicilian is bad. The Alapin Sicilian is bad for White. Look at every antisicilian, then look at the advantage; it always drops. Yes, you are correct: the Najdorf is a great opening for White; however, most often the Najdorf ends in a draw most of the time. When people lose against the antisicilians, it is because they haven't experienced enough of that line, but most antisicilians are bad; even if White has a slight advantage with these, it's still less, which is bad. Also in the Sicilian, there are many great variations with the Najdorf because of the fact that the Najdorf is a deep opening for both sides to have strong ideas that are barely stoppable. But often people who know enough about the book in the Sicilian have very high levels in elo, often making stuff like the Najdorf end in a draw. Again, there have also been crazy brilliant games for both white and black with many brilliant moves, and often each has had great defeats and great wins. Though yes, white or black don't have to choose a Najdorf Sicilian; they can choose other lines, but the only other great lines for white are the nf3 Sicilian traditional line, the open Sicilian stonewall, and also, at some levels, the McDonnell attack. Often it is also a great idea for Black to keep the Sicilian closed because White's goal vs the Sicilian can sometimes be to open it up and start crazy attacks, often having Black lose, but I have seen most brilliant games with Black keeping a closed Sicilian. Often open Sicilian is better for White and closed better for Black because Black actually gets great positions where they can hop in white position and start some kind of attack. In conclusion, it's a great opening for Black if they know every antisicilian counter often leads to Black's win, and with many other lines leading to draws, usually Black only loses if they blunder or open the position.

wow kid you dont know what ur talking about

look at the vienna gambit

fried liver attack

d4 makes chess boring and nobody even falls for the queens gambit anymore

you dont even understand gambits with e4.

have you ever heard of "material isnt everything?"

d4 is a relatively passive opening that leads to dynamic positional play. e4 contains lots of traps and is relatively riskier, but e4 yields plenty of wins too.

Queens gambit declined

we want fun games.

e4 is fun

I do understand material isn't everything I'll sack if I should I love the Queen's gambit it's one of my favorite openings look at my insights. the King's gambit isn't that bad if you have a line you wanna try it depends on the line and the level of chess. but some gambits are good if you are not careful they might be able to counter some random gambit if its a bad opening Vienna gambit queens gambit Evvan's gambit and a couple other gambits are good even the Englund gambit at some levels or the soller gambit I understand gambits just not all are good.

Going for a direct attack isn't always good if you want a great strong attack you need a lot of peices otherwise most wont be succesful attacking straight out of the opening is like putting a peice somewhere to attack some and then just having a pawn kick you away and defending there peice d4 has a stronger attack then the fried liver the fried liver is easily stopped but the the Jobava London isn't possible to stop the King's gambit is a disadvantage with an attack the Queen's gambit is and advantage with and attack the Sicilian is a great option for black from e4 the dutch isn't good against d4 though d4 takes the center by force theres not scandinavian for d4 there's a massive counterattack against th4 Englund gambit d4 isn't positional it is an attack too when you play e4 your goal is to attack the opponent with few pieces that can easily be stopped with d4 you can do that but cant be stopped if they make what you think is a mistake and you can bring thousands of peices in too with stuff like the London system and try to CRUSH THE CENTER THEN CRUSH THE GAME INTO SMITHERINES with a barely at all stopable here is the example comparison of the though mistake in in the fried liver and the true mistake jobava london

Fried Liver not working direct attack

Jobava London where the thought mistake is a mistake

fried liver stopped with one move all ideas and got a losing position white in end and jobava London worked out perfectly d4 just isn't often played as an attack but its attacks work better then e4s attack e4 is better in a positional game then attack like this one

when e4 was played positionally in that game there where better ideas for e4 then if you just start some random attack in the start that's a hard attack to stop positionally beats offensive d4 does that even better in that game they just made 2 mistake and couldn't find the best move now in that game your gonna win again positional beats attacking d4 is best at positional watch what d4 traps there are after the full london

this would be 2 700s playing but whatever there equal level but this time instead of a mating attack white developed a mating attack didn't win material checkmated instead at the 800 game of chess there where less mistakes but 800 ELO is better then 700 there white missed something an won anyway

vienna gambit is sigma

fax bro

real, finally real people lol

vienna gambit (and the vienna system as a whole) is the ticket to 2000

ya Vienna gambit is nice.