48 ( +1 | -1 ) Who hates 1e4, e5?I have a total hatred of symmetrical king pawn openings and have not participated in one for years and hundreds of games. I am not sure if this is because these games don't suit my style as black or white, or if it is because these games remind me of when I was learning to play and loosing almost every game and it brings back the memory of all that sorrow and pain. I would like to know if anyone else feels the same as me on this and if so, why you think this is?
38 ( +1 | -1 ) Not really hateBut I generally dislike 1.e4 because I have the impression that it leads to exchanging pieces quicker than 1.d4. The more pieces remain on the board, the more interesting the game is for me. Minor pieces are a wonderful thing.
Also, I rarely play 1. ...e5 as I find myself doing nothing else then defending f7 and the centre. That's something I do not find pleasent.
57 ( +1 | -1 ) i'm not a fan of it. i've experimented with the scotch opening, but it just bores me. i've tried gambits, and they're fun in blitz. i never reply with 2... e5, i either go sicilian or alekhine. but i do open with 1. e4 as white, so i see this opening a lot. i mean this with no disrespect intended, but usually i find it is the weaker players who use this opening as black, though i must point out that the highest rated player i've faced, leo_london played it against me (and of course beat me).
33 ( +1 | -1 ) 1.e4 e5Is my least favourite opening, except all the others that i've tried. For a period of time i tried a variety of other openings apart from e5 against 1.e4, excluding timeouts i didn't win a single match. And everyone (even ketchup) knows 1.e4 is the best opening for white, just about every top player on GK and OTB uses it.
47 ( +1 | -1 ) I'm sorry, I guess I havnt explained myself properly. I do not ever play 1e4 and the reason is because I hate the response..e5, I would not just quit a game because my opponent made an opening move that I don't like, that would be rather unsporting and definitely not English. It is true however that if I knew that my opponent would play something more interesting such as the French or Sicillian I would gladly open with 1e4.
32 ( +1 | -1 ) so hewhomateswins...has now admitted that he thinks e5 is the best opening for black, because he hates playing against it. If that's the case you should banish your learning-to-play demons and give e5 a whirl as black. The only reason the french is more interesting than e5 is because it increases whites chances of winning.
25 ( +1 | -1 ) I usually play 1. d4 when white because if i play 1. e4 i get scared of 1... c5 and 1... e6 and 1... c6 When i play black i never play 1... e5 against 1. e4 It's not that i hate symmetrical e-pawn openings , i just think that 1... c5 / 1... c6 and 1... e6 are too strong and i think that 1... e5 is too weak.
41 ( +1 | -1 ) 1..e5 is not weak1...e5 is not weak. we must remember that play with 1..e5 we have the opportunity of open play. In these games thay are more attack and you can do some traps or watched over, more tactic, interesting. gambits, ruy lopez, Italian, and so on. In the other games like 1..e6 or 1..c6 the aperture is semi close and the games are positional and deep. I consider more difficult compared with 1..e5 So long. migchess20
180 ( +1 | -1 ) GM "Fashions"The assertion by gt2win above that "everyone (even ketchup) knows 1.e4 is the best opening for white, just about every top player on GK and OTB uses it" turns out to be only partially correct. The last part rings true because the vast majority of professional players today will play a variety of openings to maximize their chances. However, at the present time international play is NOT dominated by e4 the way it was in periods such as the Fischer Boom when Bobby's choice of e4 made it the "fashionable" approach on all levels. That changed in the "Karpov Era" where 1.c4 and 1.Nf3 (often with attempts to gain favorable transpositions to d4 openings) become the "hot" style. Kasparov in turn burst on the scene as primarily a 1.d4 player armed with many aggressive theoretical novelties in semi-closed and closed positions, and so we saw a gazillion QIDs with a3, Botvinnik Gambits in the QG, etc. The confrontations between the K's and their later challengers pretty much forced all of them to become more universal, so e4, d4, and c4/Nf3 are today seen with relatively equal frequency (see, for instance, the recent Linares Super GM tournament where most rounds had a mix of openings).
Re 1.e4 e5: Nothing wrong with Black here, but you see this more in RR and match play at the GM level because certain lines are "safer" (such as the Petroff) in the early stages of a match or for the leader at the end of an event. That "win with White, draw with Black" philosophy was especially strong before the rise of the Swiss System open tournaments. When you fall behind in a match or RR, of course, you must break out the "Swiss" openings (especially the Sicilian and KID) and go for the jugular! As that implies, one must play to win at all times and with all colors in a Swiss, so these days masters must have that wide repertoire to be successful.
78 ( +1 | -1 ) my somewhat unorthodox take on the matter is this...
Usually I'm wanting to play MY opening... my set piece if say 1. d4 is played. But if e4 is played and I follow e5, this is playing into the other players opening repertoire... thats why I presently play the Alekhine 1.e4 nf6
1 ...e5 will result in the white player getting another change to carve out their own opening, although 1...e5 is probably the best response.
To get over all the psychology of this... one should when doing black players opening preparation setup the board with 1.e4 e5 and just face the music that this is the opening setup with white to play.
ps. arguably top tip... want to avoid e4 e5 theory? ( which lets face it is about 1/3rd of chess theory!)... play the scandinavian/alekhine, and play d4 openings as white.
132 ( +1 | -1 ) yepI totally agree with spurtus. I quit playing e4 a while ago. Now I mainly play the Nimzo-Larsen attack and the Colle System. I really like the Nimzo-Larsen attack because it is flexible. Key word: FLEXIBLE. e4 is very strong, but it is not FLEXIBLE at all. Once you play e4, you can never take it back. It is established from the first move exactly how you will play and there is little you can do to change it compared with other openings. Some people may like this, and others may care very little about actually enjoyinng chess (what a novel concept!) and simply caring about winning, so they pick the "best" opening. As for me, I like to be flexible, to keep my options open.
And we are not robots are we? There are psychological factors involved, and I personally feel very uncomfortable letting white choose the way the games is going to go that much (probably also has something to do with the fact that I don't know 1. e4 e5 openings well enough :D). Anyhow, 1. e4 e5 may be the strongest, but it may not be the best in a sense.
And Gt2win, hewhomateswins did not say he thought that e5 was the best opening, he simply said that he did not enjoy playing against it. There are openings that I do not enjoy playing agianst simply because it takes the game in a direction that I don't like, not because they are necesarily stronger.
84 ( +1 | -1 ) My opinionI like playing 1.e4, because I've found (as others have said) that it leads to a tactical game. I find I usually end up better in tactical games, then in most strategical games.
The reason for this is because I don't fare very well at the simple "placing pressure" concept, or seeing in the long run how trades will affect me.
Against 1.e4, I usually play e5, other things I have tried are d5 and Nf6, but i find e5 is the one I feel most secure with, since I need to look up more openings to use. I find that most of the players that I play OTB instantly go 1. e4 e5 2. Nf6 Nc3 3. Bb4. I understand that this is a fairly popular opening.
As white, I play 1.e4 mostly, and have some idea of which openings I would utilise. If I play 1.d4, I usually play the Queen's Gambit.
So that's my take in this situation
6 ( +1 | -1 ) @caro-kannHave you tried 1...c6 in response to 1.e4?
Just a wild guess.
15 ( +1 | -1 ) Nope, I have tried it OTB occasionally, but as for my name, I just couldn't think of anything to call myself, so I thought about putting in a misnomer.
122 ( +1 | -1 ) My experience...is to continue to play where i'm "weakest" in,to improve on that line!Thats the only way to get better,rather than avoid it! I WILL respond as 1.....e5 rather than 1....c5 time and time again,losing time and time again until I find the best line for me.Perhaps it will take years,but becoming a good symmetrical player with long previously analyzed lines,takes patience!The only way to conquer something is to confront it! Now,does that mean that I ways respond to 1.e4 with e5?Of course not,but then, I already know which lines work best for me,and vary my style alot. Also,sometimes playing a symmetry game works advantageously. For example,if you note on pg.94 of MCO-14,the Petrov tends to be a very dull and drawish type of opening.It further goes on to explain that "white can virtually force a draw by trading down to a dull symmetrical endgame"... A draw type of game is very useful if you are playing against someone who outclasses you by several hundred points above you and the chances of winning are slim.You then would gain a decent couple of points for the draw,rather than most likely lose.
35 ( +1 | -1 ) Almostevery person I played in high school played Ruy Lopez exclusively. Annoyed me to no end, so I refused to play it and went 1.d4 or responded with the Sicilian. Some 20 years later, I am finally starting to play with 1.e4 games. In the end, I got bored with d4, and wanted some more early challenges....
Mind you, I still have little interest in Ruy.
51 ( +1 | -1 ) Instead of the Ruy...Play the Kings Gambit as white.It has surprise value and has alot of sting to the unprepared,especially Ruy Players.Although I just started on this site,I have been very successful playing the Basmans Defense 1.e4,g5 against players that are stuck on playing the Ruy.Again,surprise value,and with precise play,black has only a small disadvantage,which can be equalized later in the game. These are of course,not symmetrical games,but i thought I'd just mention this anyway.
27 ( +1 | -1 ) I agree entirely with rallyvincent. When I experiment with e5 (usually in OTB blitz games), I find myself defending f7 and in a passive situation I like. I like counterpunching openings like the Caro-Kann, not just passive. There has to be imbalance for me to be comfortable.
68 ( +1 | -1 ) In my humble opinion--if you don't like it, then you probably haven't played it enough!
There is nothing wrong with it...although I rarely play 1. ... e5. In fact, I love to play against it. But then again, I love to play just about any opening. It frustrates my opponents to no end when I consistently win against them by playing something entirely different each time.
I especially love the King's Gambit. I've won a few games here on GK using it. I suspect it would be difficult to win against a prepared player, because theory is so deep in this particular opening. Yet, you might be surprise how many solid players will somewhat ignore it because of that fact.
73 ( +1 | -1 ) I'm back.Although I rarely play 1. ... e5 as black, I did in this recent game.
'Three knights' is a very different kind of game. But that is why I played it and avoided the Four Knight's game. My opponent agreed with me that it was an interesting game.
It was a long game--as far as time played. I slowed down because I was trying to figure out how to position myself to take advantage of my extra pawn. It was not easy. I was somewhat surprised that my opponent resigned when he did. Yes, I had an advantage; but I think he might have been able to continue. For the longest time the position was very awkward for Black.
18 ( +1 | -1 ) i like C 7 - C 5 against E 2 - E 4 when i play as black . as white i play E 2 - E 4 and like playing against E 7 - E 5 . im learning the evans gambit and thinking about learning the kings gambit .
21 ( +1 | -1 ) In e4-e5 openings the best opening is the King's Gambit never a dull , lots attacks and very interesting postions, very good to learn,thats why I love it, thats is why I plat it all the time Thanks.
19 ( +1 | -1 ) Philidor Counter GambitI also like this line Philidor Counter Gambit 1 e4-e5 2 Nf3-d6 3 d4-f5!. White does not know what to do here very interseting for Black.I think Black is better here.
40 ( +1 | -1 ) Hmmmnnnn.... I dislike 1.e4 immensely: unless I play against a really weak player, it fails me every time. The same goes for 1...e5! I think the title of that book by Larry Evans said it all: An Unbeatable White Repertoire after 1.e4 e5, 2. Nf3!
As White I open with 1. a3, though I've also used 1. d4 (going for a Torre). As Black I've varied considerably--making use of openings like the Sicilian, & the St. George.
28 ( +1 | -1 ) Kings gambitI know that I started this thread but I have to say that the only e4, e5 opening that I would consider is the kings gambit because it does not follow the same boring moves as most of the others. I just haven't got the b******s to play it against anyone good yet.
68 ( +1 | -1 ) I played 1. ...e5 OTB last night. It was an exciting game, for me at least. (However, I am usually excited about every chess game I play.)
I thought he was going to play Vienna. The guy knew how strong I was (and he definitely knew better than to do it) but he had the b******* to bring out his Queen on the third move! I even asked him whether it was a joke and offered him a take-back. He said, "No, that's OK"; and I quickly served his 'head' upon a platter. I don't think he will ever try that against me again. It had to be somewhat embarrassing to him. He 'took it in stride' though. Maybe he just wanted to see how I would handle it. I don't know. He is a good player and usually beats just about everyone else he plays.
35 ( +1 | -1 ) King's GambitThe GM that still plays the King' Gambit at the top level or GrandMaster level is Boris Spassky and few others ones I forget the names.You have to live and die with the King' Gambit to play it all the time. But I still love the opening it is the best one of all. When I open e4 and somebody matches e5 I will always play a King's Gambit!!!!!!!!!!!. Thanks.
55 ( +1 | -1 ) Kings gambitIve just had a quick look at your game Longbow, most impressive and well done. But my problem with the kings gambit is that it leads to what appears to be a complete free for all slugfest of a game and therefore a complete change to what I am used to playing, it does look exciting though and I guess it isn't likely to cause to many boring draws. I think I would like to play it so if anyone with a similar rating to me wants to have a few unrated KG games as both black and white please get in touch.
39 ( +1 | -1 ) Hmmnnn... The King's Gambit has the advantage of being time-tested (it's perhaps the oldest known opening), & still used to this day. If one is careful, the King's Gambit has a lot of opportunity with its multitude of variations (I used to play the Muzio for a time). The downside is also that since it's been around for so long people can find ample material on it, & it's also very unforgiving of mistakes.
42 ( +1 | -1 ) longbow57 ...GM David Bronstein was also willing to play the KG in serious competition, and often preferred to, tho he also made it clear he considered the Ruy Lopez very strong. In his book of "200 Open Games" he tell how he wanted to play the KG in one of the Chess Olympiad's, but was specifically over-ruled by his team Captain, Botvinnik; who told the team before it started that the KG was not to be played. Bronstein did not miss the fact this was said for his benefit.