... could you write this in paragraphs please?
Is 1.e4 and 1.d4 twisted, risky and unreliable?
Sort:
The english can be met by as many good first move responses than d4 can, and you have to know more transpositions into other openings.
It's impossible for white to be prepared for everything after 1.e4 and it's impossible for black to prepare everything after white's 2nd move (and so on). So the players both take part in steering the game into lines where they're comfortable. If you play chess for only 1 year with 1.e4 you're already going to have an idea of what you do against each of the major responses. Chess is not an easy game! Luckily it's just as hard for our opponent.
In your example, maybe you like the Ruy Lopez best and your opponent plays a Sicilian. But there are many many lines in the Sicilian, neither player knows them all. White has a large choice against 1...c5.
The really odd openings or openings that can be played against anything let you surprise your opponent or bypass their opening knowledge but only offer equality against a solid opponent. Playing more main line openings lets you fight for an advantage right away.
of course there are good replies to any first move but if you don't play 1.e4 or 1.d4, the opponent will play 1..e5 or 1..d5 like against bird's opening or 1.b3 or any other garbage, and then you will be a tempo down.
reti and english, especially the english are valid openings.
the reason there is so much theory behind 1.e4 or 1.d4 is because they are good moves.
You forget something: we do not play openings, we play CHESS.
If you learn chess strategy and tactics, it does not matter how many openings do you know. You will always find good moves.
(It is more than enough to follow the opening principles, and by that you can play openings that you do not know. This is how I play the pirc defence, the phillidor-defence and such openings)
Yes, opening principles will not help you to play long theoretical forcing lines, but who said they must be played? You need to control the center, develop your pieces, castle, connect your rooks and that is all, different openings are different ways how to realize it. Leave the poisoned pawn variations and such for strong players :D
pdve wrote:
of course there are good replies to any first move but if you don't play 1.e4 or 1.d4, the opponent will play 1..e5 or 1..d5 like against bird's opening or 1.b3 or any other garbage, and then you will be a tempo down.
reti and english, especially the english are valid openings.
the reason there is so much theory behind 1.e4 or 1.d4 is because they are good moves.
1.b3 is not garbage it is a valid opening just one that does not play for an advantage but for a comfortable game
1.b3 is not a valid opeing! It's just fine.
I agree that 1. e4 is very risky. If someone knows their Fred defence very well white could be in a lot of trouble since they won't know what to do because the opening is rare. White's best chance is probably to transpose to the Swiss gambit to try to confuse black. Black still gets an advantage but white isn't immediately losing.
The North Sea defence and the St. George defence are also good tries for an advantage for black against 1. e4 but are not quite as effective IMO.
1.e4 risky? All white needs to know is the opening ideas behind the main-line systems. After that, its just a game of chess.
To avoid such 'risks' there something called transpositions, trust me, it works.
ZakayoMatasi wrote:
To avoid such 'risks' there something called transpositions, trust me, it works.
Which is why white must transpose out of the Fred defence into the Swiss gambit immidiately to avoid black's opening knowledge although the position is naturally still better for black since white has been taken out of book and will end up down a pawn.
To me, When you play 1.e4 or 1.d4, You accept 10 good replys that can come after you. 1.e4/1.d4 then the reply of 1. ...b6 or 1. ...c6 or 1. ...c5 or 1. ...Nc6 or 1. ...d6 or 1. ...d5 or 1. ...e6 or 1. ...e5 or 1. ...Nf6 or 1. ...g6. It is impossible to master all of this openings unless ur a professional or more advanced than that. U might face players that are magicains when it comes to the sicilian defense or alekhine defene or carro-kan or pirc defense or frensh defense or the KID or the dutch defense etc.
Imagine going to an otb and u dnt know which opening ur going to face when playing 1.e4/1.d4 ...I ask others,
"what opening do u play and study?" and they some reply "THE RUY-LOPEZ" and then I reply "what would u do If none of ur games reached the ruy lopez in ths big tournament and all ur effort came was for nothing?" and then they reply "I will still play my best and control the center and attack for a win" and then I reply "what about you opponent that has a good black opening against 1.e4/1.d4 installed with perfection like a grandmaster in his/her brain and can crush u in the opening or probably ur opponent has already prepared at home and won't waste time like poor u who is only thinking during the match letting the clock sing tick-tock in a must win game for you and one positional or tactical mistake and then ur most probably fried in the opening?"
I play 1.e4 and 1.d4 for fun and I only play 1.e4 if I have to win knowing the consequenses I will have to suffer in an otb. so I say yes 1.e4/1.d4 is risky and unreliable and will be refuted in the future. No wonder I am studying the boring English and Reti Opening that is not likely to score quick openings BUT reliable openings which u can always play for a win.