e4 is for aggressive players and d4 for something between. Pure positional player would play 1. Nf3
Not true. You can play passively with 1.e4 and aggressively with 1.Nf3. The first move is just that....a move. I don't understand why people feel the need to make these huge generalizations based on white's first move.
e4 is for aggressive players and d4 for something between. Pure positional player would play 1. Nf3
Not true. You can play passively with 1.e4 and aggressively with 1.Nf3. The first move is just that....a move. I don't understand why people feel the need to make these huge generalizations based on white's first move.
whoa. wait a minute...i've played E4 and finished a game in four moves. that's pretty huge.
Leon, thread back on track, I'm learning the Mexican, you think I'm funny, and I'm currently eating tacos.
Ahhhh can this day get any better??
The Mexican attack is actually quite powerful in blitz. GM Reshevsky used it in a simul against mostly Class B players and a few class A. He did NOT lose a single game. This was a LONG time ago, in Fischer's time.
It is just matter of taste but I would not recommend playing Réti aggressively from the beginning. And as for e4...it can really be a passive play (giocco pianissimo for example)
It is just matter of taste but I would not recommend playing Réti aggressively from the beginning. And as for e4...it can really be a passive play (giocco pianissimo for example)
Agreed....the italian game (guico piano) is pretty passive.
e4 may be considered better as it opens up BOTH the Bishop and Queen diagonals in ONE move. D4 only opens the queenside bishop. However, d4 can be very tactical, and I speak from experience here. I have been playing Queen pawn openings like the Catalan and London System for ages (since I was 13). I am 25 now.
e4 may be considered better as it opens up BOTH the Bishop and Queen diagonals in ONE move. D4 only opens the queenside bishop. However, d4 can be very tactical, and I speak from experience here. I have been playing Queen pawn openings like the Catalan and London System for ages (since I was 13). I am 25 now.
All openings are tactical. Chess is all about tactics. It's just that "open" and "semi-open" games offer more immediate threats that is more conducive for novices to learn and develop. But traps can be laid in any opening. And it's not like positional awareness or strategy doesn't matter in open games (which can arise from 1.d4 games too). Subtleties galore.
e4 may be considered better as it opens up BOTH the Bishop and Queen diagonals in ONE move. D4 only opens the queenside bishop. However, d4 can be very tactical, and I speak from experience here. I have been playing Queen pawn openings like the Catalan and London System for ages (since I was 13). I am 25 now.
All openings are tactical. Chess is all about tactics. It's just that "open" and "semi-open" games offer more immediate threats that is more conducive for beginners to learn and develop. But traps can be laid in any opening. And it's not like positional awareness or strategy doesn't matter in open games (which can arise from 1.d4 games too).
hmmm yeah I have to agree with you.
D4 is not very tactical but very defensive
D4 is not very tactical but very defensive
It may not be very tactical, but it certainly is NOT very defensive. Now, if you play the Queen's gambit and black plays the super drawish boring slav defense.....then okay you might as well just agree to a draw immediately.
D4 is not very tactical but very defensive
It may not be very tactical, but it certainly is NOT very defensive. Now, if you play the Queen's gambit and black plays the super drawish boring slav defense.....then okay you might as well just agree to a draw immediately.
D4 is not very tactical but very defensive
It may not be very tactical, but it certainly is NOT very defensive. Now, if you play the Queen's gambit and black plays the super drawish boring slav defense.....then okay you might as well just agree to a draw immediately.
do you even knows chess?
do you even knows grammar? Also, Kasparov never ever ever ever ever lost when he played the slav defense. Oh and considering I am rated 1800 in bullet, blitz, and USCF.....I know at least a little about chess, yes.
D4 is not very tactical but very defensive
It may not be very tactical, but it certainly is NOT very defensive. Now, if you play the Queen's gambit and black plays the super drawish boring slav defense.....then okay you might as well just agree to a draw immediately.
D4 is not very tactical but very defensive
But there's a funny thing in chess, GMs are more likely to play 1.d4 when they need a win, and 1.e4 is considered more drawish.
Not that beginners and club players are incorrect... 1.e4 can lead to many gambits and wild open games.
In reality the position still hasn't been defined after just 1 move. Both first moves can lead to positions all across the chess spectrum, aggressive, passive, logical, chaotic, open, closed, etc.
There really is a Mexican Defense although I guess some people disagree with this name and give it the horrible moniker "black knights tango..."
But there's a funny thing in chess, GMs are more likely to play 1.d4 when they need a win, and 1.e4 is considered more drawish.
Actually, you have it backwards there.
But there's a funny thing in chess, GMs are more likely to play 1.d4 when they need a win, and 1.e4 is considered more drawish.
Actually, you have it backwards there.
No.
And not only GMs. In fact you should be good enough to know better.
1.e4 has lots of good ways to kill the position when you want a draw, and when you want to win the Berlin and Petroff are annoying.
No.
And not only GMs. In fact you should be good enough to know better.
1.e4 has lots of good ways to kill the position when you want a draw, and when you want to win the Berlin and Petroff are annoying.
Both the Berlin and the Petrov have a relatively high draw percentage, yes. And it's natural to see a Berlin or Petrov game and think, "Man, these must be the most drawish opening lines ever!"
But the Queen's Gambit Declined is played more frequently than either of those—and it still boasts a higher draw percentage. Especially the Three Knights variation, which draws at a whopping 65%.
So, yes—even with the drawish nature of the Berlin and the Petrov, 1.d4 still leads to more drawn games at the GM level (compared to 1.e4), mainly because of the existence of the QGD.
... the Queen's Gambit Declined is played more frequently than either of those—and it still boasts a higher draw percentage. Especially the Three Knights variation, which draws at a whopping 65%. ...
After 1 d4 d5 2 c4 e6 3 Nc3 Nf6, how often do strong players choose 4 Nf3 ?
The September 2017 issue of Chess lists the top twenty openings compiled from a list of 2798 July games where both players were rated over 2400 Elo. One can not take position on this list too seriously because it is greatly influenced by how the openings are grouped. For example, all the Retis are grouped together, while English is separated into 1...c5, 1...e5, etc. Nevertheless, for what it is worth, some of the list entries are: 177 Retis, 122 Caro-Kanns, 121 King's Indians, 114 declined Queen's Gambits, 98 Najdorf Sicilians, 97 Slavs, 77 Nimzo-Indians, 70 1...e5 Englishes, 64 1...c5 Englishes, 63 Queen's Indians, 62 Closed Ruy Lopezes, 57 Berlin Ruy Lopezes, 56 Classical Gruenfelds, 55 Tarrasch Frenches, 48 1...Nf6 Englishes, and 44 Kan Sicilians.
e4 is for aggressive players and d4 for something between. Pure positional player would play 1. Nf3
I have played 1000s of games with d4 and I am a Class A player....and I have noticed that d4 is actually much more aggressive than many would think. However, yes I do agree that e4 is more aggressive in general, of course, sir. Thank you for your feedback