The main first move advantage is increased ability to reach positions you like to play.
On the advantage of the first move
Sort:
Hi,
What you are trying to compare with physics is called in chess "initiative". This is what chess is all about. At least that is how I see it. No matter how good you are at endgames, middlegame or how well you know the opening: if the opponent has a double threat everytime he makes a move (or is threatening to do it in the next move), and all you do is defending your position over and over and over throughout the whole game you are very likely to blunder in one of those moves - let's not kid ourselves: we're humans.
How many times we've blundered and dropped a piece just because we've been under pressure for 10 moves in a row, with our king threatened to be mated?... and all of a sudden while we're focused on finding a good response, bam! we drop a piece. This is possible because you're under pressure since your rival has the initiative.
Undoubtlessly the first move gives you the initiative: White dictates the tempo. That's why we always talk about equalizing for Black, that is eliminating that iniciative inherent to the first move. Once you equalize then you play for a win. Sometimes your opponent is just too passive or blunders, so that you equalize, and take the iniciative all at the same time.
That's my take on that. Regards.
Here is the way I used to play practical chess. Play for a win from the start even if you have Black. If you have Black and you are countering White's moves and also putting the pressure back to White, well he will not be expecting this. Often White will be disconcerted and you can pounce!
This will not work if chess engines are allowed so I am talking about over-the-board play and correspondence without chess engines. If you can notch up a bunch of wins with Black, you will win a lot of tournaments.
yes i understand what initiative is, however my query is not what it is, but rather whether there is any advantage in the first move, it appears to me that there is none, for unless the so called initiative can be converted into something tangible then its essentially irrelevant who has the first move, at least to my mind, for the reasons stated. It seems that at amateur level it may be even less important.
Sep 16, 2013
0
#7
From what I can figure out the advantage of White becomes more pronounced as your rating increases. For GM's it is significant.
robbie_1969 wrote:
Now time in chess is like energy in science, it can dissipate or be transformed into something else, like potential and kinetic energy. If one imagines a skier at the precipice of a hill as the skier descends the potential energy becomes kinetic, now in chess, it must be the same, the potential force or energy of the chess men gets released as the game progresses.
The question however remains, is it more or less advantageous to descend quickly down a sharp slope releasing the energy quickly or to descend gradually down a much larger hill eventually reaching the same speed in the end, thus it seems absurd to me to talk of the advantage of the first move, like saying how long is a piece of string.
That was so deep that I just could not understand it.
What is the advantage of having the first move in chess? It appears to me to be nothing more than the ability to dictate the tempo of the game, for example after 1.d4 d5 2.c4 the pawns come into direct contact and black is essentially coerced to take measures to do something in the centre, thus white, through use of force, dictates the tempo of the game.
Its even more pronounced in king pawn games, 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 and immediately blacks centre is under attack after which he has a few good ways to defend it 2...Nc6 directly or 2...Nf6 indirectly but that he is forced or coerced to defend it, is self evident and thus the advantage of the first move simply lies in the ability to dictate the tempo of the game.
Now time in chess is like energy in science, it can dissipate or be transformed into something else, like potential and kinetic energy. If one imagines a skier at the precipice of a hill as the skier descends the potential energy becomes kinetic, now in chess, it must be the same, the potential force or energy of the chess men gets released as the game progresses.
The question however remains, is it more or less advantageous to descend quickly down a sharp slope releasing the energy quickly or to descend gradually down a much larger hill eventually reaching the same speed in the end, thus it seems absurd to me to talk of the advantage of the first move, like saying how long is a piece of string.
If anyone can check this variation as to soundness, for i may be capable of rational thought, maybe not i would be pleased - regards robbie