Is E4 Solved?

There is an old quote by the legendary Bob Fischer students of our sport have seen repeatedly, “E4, best by test”.

Today, I wish to discuss this platitude.  With modern advancement in theory and computer evaluation, is this still the case?

For this study, I have decided to use myself as the basis for testing. Therefore, I have employed E4 almost exclusively as my opening as white in my blitz games.

However, my current blitz rating at the moment is at an impressive, however, not brilliant, 1149.

As such, this trial run begs the question, have modern computers and chess theory rendered E4 a solved win for black?

Apparently not...

That didn't paste well...

Anyway, according to the chess.com database white wins with e4 38%, ties 31%, and loses 31%.  Titled players.

By Jiminy it's good to see you're alive and well @VladimirHerceg91!

Another winner of a topic I see - let's hope it doesn't fly over peoples' heads this time...

Thanks Matt!

Do you know how far back the data goes. I wonder if there is a trend line down for e4 let’s say from Fischer’s area to now.

Please don't take this the wrong way, but  weak player is a weak player whether he opens 1.e4, 1.d4, 1,c4, 1.Nf3 or anything else

I agree.  But it’s confusing why a player of my caliber is unable to dominate with this opening.

We know that it isn't because that would be a huge sensation we would have heard of.

Well, when Kasparov was forced to win as white vs Karpov in 1987, he decided that e4 was not a good choice.

Which opening do you use to dominate?

Was thinking the same - Fischer's remark assumed near perfect play on both sides.

A solved win for black? Lol

I don't want to make too radical a suggestion, but I think that the skill of the player just might have some influence on the outcome of the game. A few years ago I was a spectator at a Hikaru Nakamura 40-player simul. Starting on board 1, he played 1.e2, 1.d4, 1.c4, and 1.f4 and continued the in the same order all around the room. In the end he scored 10/10 with 1.e4, 10/10 with d4, 10/10 with 1.c4, and 10/10 with 1.f4. So maybe--just maybe--the first move isn't so crucial

Hi Vlad.

None of the opening moves are solved.

If top-level engines can't decide whether a move like 1. f3 wins, loses or draws, then there is no chance that they can solve 1. e4 in the near future.

That is a very controversial idea if you don’t mind me saying it. I would think it was probably a random event that Nakamura won all those games. Perhaps, “beginners luck”?

I'm sure once you become an expert, say about 1200 rating or so, you'll be able to dominate using e4. I'm sure you have noticed experts rarely, if ever, lose when starting with e4. Once you become an expert, you'll be less confused. 

I don't think e4 will ever be solved, unless there is a forced win for white.

Reason being that most games are draws, matter of fact 70% are draws, so forced variations are not going to made as there are too many systems and there are so many ways to go in the game of chess. Only exception is with engines but even so lines are so broad and vast that even for engines that is something that wouldn't be forced from them from the beginning.

If you see the variations that white plays against e4 such as the Sicilian Defense, Kings Pawn(e5), French, Caro-Kann even Owens Defense. All of these variations are variations that are not forced lines and what's more is the fact that the Sicilian is an open system, Kings pawn is an open system, and french is an open system from my experience (just to name a few different opening against e4 with many lines). All of those openings have expansive lines and are not forced openings it is determined by different moves, different theory and different positions and because of this e4 is far from being an opening that is "best by test". However it is not an opening that is inferior by far as it is one of the best openings and notable openings in chess, however it is an opening that is perfect as no chess opening is perfect or leads to perfect lines for winning.

Secondly and more importantly openings are by preference and by choice, different openings are played due to a person's understanding, level of theory but more importantly comforbality, familiarity, style and personality of a chess player. It has never been because of e4 or any other opening being the best. Saying an opening is "best" is subjective and again is by style, and personality but even in this it is other factos as well as experience and interest in it to boalster someone's ability in an opening.

So there is many reasons why e4 is great and it proves as it has been dominated by Bobby Fischer doing his time, and such players as well as Jose Raul Capablanca, and Paul Morphy as well. However saying the opening is best by test is incorrect as people have preferences and those preferences are subjective not objective and because of this that means no opening is won by force and each is to its own for an opening and how great a player can play with it and see the opening in their own eyesight.

With this understanding e4 is not best but all openings are great if played well with person of great style for the opening and great experience with it and other factors. It shows that e4 is not solved and probably never will be, if it is solved it will be solved because of engines, however if that is the case it will be in a long while. So I believe that all openings are playable and until chess is 100% a draw for both sides in all manners of play(in which is impossible) I think that no opening will be best or too much inferior than the rest(even though again there is no inferior opening, because again it is by preference. And one player that may be inferior with one opening another player may be great at that opening.)

Do you have something against bobby -_-

Of course not. He’s probably in the top 30 of the greatest players of all time. As a student of Chess, I respect him tremendously.