jurassicmc wrote:
They give the initiative to black player because of this , yes, sometimes 1.d4 is for cowards players .
Isn't that what you want?
Is 1.e4 for heros and 1.d4 for cowards? elaborate.
Sort:
I play e4 because I'm a coward I never learned to play d4 and I'm to afraid to try it. my next step will be study all the transpositions from d4 to a Sicilian Yugoslav attack or any other e4 opening so I'll be very comfortable playing d4
xMbele wrote:
most of 1.d4 games end up as draws. 1.e4 games are rarely draws. I Play 1.e4 because when I'll lose after I played my "1.e4" then I'll know that I tried something terrifing and that I enjoyed the 1.e4 game, ah but 1.d4 hai that doe'snt make the game exciting. I dnt want to lose after I played something boring(positional) without fireworks and without making the game exciting, If I lose after I played the 1.d4 game I will feel like there is something I missed and I never made a brilliant attack,it was boring blah blah blah. where-else in a 1.e4 game, "If ur a good player, u will atleast get a chance for a brilliant attack against ur opponent even when pieces down". The Problem about 1.d4 is that "one mistake, just one littile blunder against A GOOD PLAYER" u will lose!
This contradicts itself.
One little mistake makes you lose, but it always draws?
d4 and e4 are the same...... just like the 2 sides of the coin
According to Pandolfini and Waitzkin, The Queen's Pawn opening move is somewhat slower than the popular e4, because White will not be able to castle for three more moves. Its advantage is that it gives White more control over tactical surprises and often provides more lasting initiative and pressure.
Well, I think if one has just started chess, e4 is the best move and if he likes it he can continue playing that(the case with me).However if one wants to play highly tactical positions then d4 is I think the best option. (though tactical openings such as King's Gambit are there ine4,it does not work well at high level)
AndyClifton wrote:
1 g3 is for guys who look like this:
lol
Mar 22, 2013
0
#90
2 Words about 1.e4: UTTER CRAP!
1.d4!! Rules
The Proof:
http://www.charlottechess.com/games2/1106.htm (1.e4??, 0-1)
http://www.charlottechess.com/games2/1123.htm (1.e4??, 0-1)
http://www.charlottechess.com/games2/1147.htm (1.e4??, 0-1)
http://www.charlottechess.com/games2/1163.htm (1.e4??, 0-1)
http://www.charlottechess.com/games2/1116.htm (1.d4!!, 1-0)
http://www.charlottechess.com/games2/1127.htm (1.d4!!, 1-0)
http://www.charlottechess.com/games2/1160.htm (1.d4!!, 1-0)
http://www.charlottechess.com/games2/1169.htm (1.d4!!, 1-0)
Clearly Fischer was wrong, I mean, 8 carefully selected games sure is compelling evidence.
paulgottlieb wrote:
1.d4 was the usual first choice of many of the greatest attacking players in history, and many of the most brilliant games started that way. Alekhine, Spassky, Kasparov, Frank Marshall, Pillsbury, Tal--all of these attacking geniuses were happy to start their attacks with 1.d4.
The first move doesn't determine the chracter of the game: the Berlin Defense to the Ruy leads to a complex, slow maneuvering game after 1.e4. The Botvinnik variation of the Semi-Slav leads to mind-blowing tactics after 1.d4
Spassky played 1 e4 more than he played 1 d4 , almost twice as much actually .
ofc Fischer is the man!!!
I prefer c4
e4 can lead to a lot of tactical games.
d4, in turn, can lead to positional games. But that doesn't mean it's cowardly. It's just a different style of playing.
Chances are, those who don't know d4 games well enough will find themselves losing quite quickly and not understand why (because often there are key squares and strategies involved that aren't as obvious as tactical moves).
I'd say d4 is more for those who actually study the game. One wrong move and you're done, though you may not realize it for ten or twelve more moves.
Usually those who think d4 games are "cowardly" or "boring" are those who don't understand what's going on.
Do you know how to properly conduct a minority attack and create a backward pawn weakness? How about defending against it? These types of things are important to know in d4 games. Playing them incorrectly can often become an automatic loss.
Mar 22, 2013
0
#98
Reb wrote:
Fischer said 1 e4 is " best by test " , who should one believe ?!
Who should you believe? Not Fischer. He was nuts. You should believe Korchnoi, Karpov, Dreev, etc
ThrillerFan wrote:
Reb wrote:
Fischer said 1 e4 is " best by test " , who should one believe ?!
Who should you believe? Not Fischer. He was nuts. You should believe Korchnoi, Karpov, Dreev, etc
Fischer wasnt nuts. He became world champion and is probably the most famous chessplayer ever, what have you sane person achieved in comparison to him??
How can you call such a successful person nuts???
Why don't we just look at the Candidates tournament to see what opening really is best by test:
d4 - 11 draws, 2 win, 2 lossesWhite score: =
e4 - 2 draw, 1 win, 2 loss White score: -1
c4 - 1 draw, 0 win, 0 loss White score: =
Nf3 - 2 draws, 1 win, 0 loss White score: +1
Total - 16 draws, 4 wins, 4 losses, White score: =
So, the most played opening was d4, while the highest scoring opening was Nf3, which frequently transposes to either a d4 game or a c4 game. e4 is scoring the worst out of all of the openings.
To battle against 1.d4 positional players i play 1.e5 Englund Gambit
This variation is known as Zilbermints gambit with 3...Nge7 , at moment i have very good results with this line against adversaries with 2200-2300 FIDE. The Main Line 3...Qe7 has a positional problem, the Black player recover quickly the pawn but the Queen is not good in e7.