I have played each for a serious amount of time (at least 6 months) and I like c4 the best, but I score best with e4. d4 gets me into positions that I just don't like a lot of the time (ones which c4 avoids). e4 is much better scoring because I don't typically give up draws/losses to lower rated players since I have the initiative more often and they rarely defend well.
My views: first the most simple to me.
d4
d4 is to me a move with which it is hard to go wrong, but positions frequently end up in a stalemate, and are often incredibly repetitive. I still play it sometimes though to fire a broadside into the opponent's preparation.
c4
c4 is a very good move, I know. But it is complicated and tough to learn and at my level I am unsure about whether to play it or not.
e4
e4 leads to plenty of different positions. I also used to play the King's Gambit, where as now the Lopez, Scotch and Piano are great.
But it lacks fundamental madness, and fun is an important part of chess, I think.
1.e4 small wave surfers. lots of little tactical stings, like a million mosquitoes attacking you. but still, malaria mosquitoes kill more people every year than anything else.
1.d4 big wave surfers. at first there's nothing to be seen. the surface looks calm. but the wave is building up far from the shore, slowly but unstoppably, building, building... until it crashes in and blows your kindom into oblivion.
1.c4 I have never understood these guys. it looks ugly to me, but clearly it works.
1.f4 my current favourite. it's not d4, but it's okay. and at this point I almost always know the positions better than my opponents. I get good, active positions, and the opponents almost invariably overestimate the weakness of my king. it's not weak, it's active. I get to play the same moves against almost anything. as a plus, there's almost no established theory in the lines I get 99% of the time, and only a handful of db games.
the downside is that black gets lots of natural moves. but hey, I'm not really hoping black just stumbles and throws the game.
Originally posted by ares3that's one of the worst games I've ever seen.
Here we are.
[Event "RHP Blitz rated"]
[Site "www.redhotpawn.com"]
[Date "2007.12.13"]
[Round "?"]
[White "mjolnir"]
[Black "sathyam"]
[Result "1-0"]
1. e2-e4 e7-e5 2. Ng1-f3 h7-h6 3. Nf3xe5 f7-f6 4. Qd1-h5 Ke8-e7 5. Ne5-g6 Ke7-e6 6. Qh5-d5 1-0
Originally posted by Mephisto2Well, true. It was an example of how e4 can deviate into plenty of different variations and attacks.
If this proves that 1.e4 is a dangerous weapon, then so is 1.e3. Against black's play, 1.e3 would give excactly the same game.😕
Mephisto, I'd be interested to see where you stand. Would you say that it is more how they are followed up, or do you prefer one?
Originally posted by ares3no it wasn't. it was a lesson for a rank beginner of what happens when you move f-pawn without covering against Qh5+.
Well, true. It was an example of how e4 can deviate into plenty of different variations and attacks.
if the game would've gone on for longer, it could've also been a lesson of what happens when you drop material on move 2 without compensation.
Originally posted by wormwoodYou don't understand what I was getting at. The Qh5+ itself is something that you can use with e4. As is Bxf7+ sacrifices and many others.
no it wasn't. it was a lesson for a rank beginner of what happens when you move f-pawn without covering against Qh5+.
if the game would've gone on for longer, it could've also been a lesson of what happens when you drop material on move 2 without compensation.
🙄
What do you prefer then?
I play c4 right now because it fits in well with my Sicilian. However, I haven't gotten deep enough into the others to be able to make an honest comparison. I know most of the basic ideas in the major 1. e4 and 1. d4 openings and can play quite a few book moves just by understanding. I've actually played both for several months, but the more subtle nuances are probably not yet visible for me.