Is RHP favoring 1.e4 too much?

Originally posted by DeepThought
This argument doesn't work. You're assuming that 1. e4 players play more games than 1. d4 players to explain a discrepancy in results between two different databases. Here are my own statistics:

My first moves (I'm white):
Move Games
e4 541 59%
d4 152 17%
f4 92 10%
c4 87 10%
a3 18 2%
f3 10 1%
Nf3 3 0.3%
g3 3 0.3%
b4 2 50% 50%
908 total g ...[text shortened]... 039 4%
Total 27433

So I think it's just that stronger players are more likely to play 1. d4.

The problem with your argument is that in both sets of data 1.d4 is played 27% of the time (except by you). How does that lead you to conclude a difference based on strength?

Chess teachers seem to believe that closed games are to difficult for beginner and they all begin with King's gambit and 2 Knights game.

Of all wold champions, Spassky was only one who played 1. d4 as a kid.

But I remember that patzers used to have rule: to move twice at the beginning,
so usually games began like this.

1. e4 and d4
abd Black replises either
1... e5 and d5,

or 1.... e6 and d6.

Originally posted by iChopWoodForFree
The problem with your argument is that in both sets of data 1.d4 is played 27% of the time (except by you). How does that lead you to conclude a difference based on strength?

No, you should be comparing the figures for my white opponents and the overall RHP > 2,000 with the figures in the O.P.. The trend is in the right direction - 62% goes down to 54% and 22% up to 27%. The number of players playing c4 or Nf3 also get closer to the comparison db the OP used.

I've had a quick check on my database which has similar statistics as the database in the OP if all players are included. If one only includes players where the rating is recorded as over 2,500 the results keep moving in the direction I'm talking about:

Move all >2,500
e4 48.0% 39.8%
d4 33.7% 40.5%
c4 6.9% 8.1%
Nf3 8.4% 10.2%

So GM's play e4 and d4 with almost equal frequency. I think I've to all intents and purposes proved my case. On my database of games there's a clear trend towards playing e4 and it is due to the lower rated players. The same trend, although not as pronounced, is present on the RHP database.

Originally posted by tvochess
This is a plausible explanation. But why is that?

According to BigDogProblem, e4 is more drawish on the GM level because of the Berlin Wall, but that is in the Ruy Lopez only, and I think one of the reasons the Sicilian became popular (which is still an e4 opening).

Someone else mentioned that he/she considers e4 to more difficult to play because of t ...[text shortened]... es.

Bonus question: how to play d4? what should a d4-player aim for in the first 10-15 moves?

I think there's a few of reasons why e4 is more popular than d4 with weaker players. The major one is that GM's are professionals and the rest of us are amateurs and tend to have to specialize to cut down workload. So there tend to be relatively few amateur players who play both 1. e4 and 1. d4.

So the next question is why e4 and not d4? I think you are basically right, I think that by the time someone is going for opening specialization they are generally not pushing their pawns forward the way some complete beginners do. So I suspect that a major one is that the e4 openings tend to allow quicker attacks. It's just easier to understand where to put your pieces. I think that it's just that the d4 openings are technically more difficult. There are traps all over the place and white can't really avoid theory. I think beginners often want to specialize as they improve and e4 is the more likely choice.

Personally I started playing e4 exclusively to force myself to cope with openings tactics in every game, which was the right thing to do then, but in the meantime it's become a bit of a habit. It also meant I only had to cope with one set of defences, I also always found the Nimzo-Indian difficult to deal with. I'm trying to understand 1. c4 at the moment; I've played 1. d4 and although my overall results are about the same for 1. d4 and 1. e4 I found that my results with 1. d4 are worse against better players (>1,800) than my results with 1. e4 - which is weak evidence for my notion that weaker players find 1. d4 games harder.

As far as your bonus question is concerned, it depends, but after 1. d4 and 2. c4 white's got space on the queenside and needs to look to exploit it somehow. A queenside attack may be the way forward, another potential plan is to try to give your opponent an isolated queen pawn and attack it, or try to obtain an IQP and use it as a battering ram. It depends on what black does. It's not that d4 openings are more sophisticated than e4 ones, it's just that it's harder to avoid having to use more indirect approaches than in e4 openings.

Thanks all posters for their opinions. This is how I see it now:

- It makes sense to think that 1.e4 is easier to understand (at first sight) for normal (I shouldn't say weaker, because this holds for most of us) players. There are immediate attacking opportunities. This is likely more comfortable and more fun for casual players.

- In contrast, GM's are playing for result, and hence a different logic applies.

Originally posted by DeepThought
I think there's a few of reasons why e4 is more popular than d4 with weaker players. The major one is that GM's are professionals and the rest of us are amateurs and tend to have to specialize to cut down workload. So there tend to be relatively few amateur players who play both 1. e4 and 1. d4.

So the next question is why e4 and not d4? I think yo ...[text shortened]... it's just that it's harder to avoid having to use more indirect approaches than in e4 openings.

So there tend to be relatively few amateur players who play both 1. e4 and 1. d4

robbie carrobie
e4 572 42% 49%
d4 233 44% 47%
c4 108 51% 35% 😲

Originally posted by tvochess
- It makes sense to think that 1.e4 is easier to understand (at first sight) for normal (I shouldn't say weaker, because this holds for most of us) players. There are immediate attacking opportunities. This is likely more comfortable and more fun for casual players.

Also, open games force you to learn about tactics, which is something amateurs need to learn more about than professionals. It's the reason why I switched from d4 to e4.

Doesn't help when your opponent starts playing the Caro, mind you... 😛

Originally posted by Shallow Blue
Also, open games force you to learn about tactics, which is something amateurs need to learn more about than professionals. It's the reason why I switched from d4 to e4.

Doesn't help when your opponent starts playing the Caro, mind you... 😛

I was never convinced by that argument. There are two elements in almost every position, a strategic one and a tactical one, the real skill is finding which one is most telling.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I was never convinced by that argument. There are two elements in almost every position, a strategic one and a tactical one, the real skill is finding which one is most telling.

Is this by move 5 or move 10? I think it's that openings fireworks happen far more quickly in King's pawn openings. It's not that Queen's pawn openings can't be tactical, it's just that one is forced to concentrate right from the start in 1. e4 openings, whereas in d4 openings it's a lot easier to go to sleep for a few moves.

Originally posted by DeepThought
Is this by move 5 or move 10? I think it's that openings fireworks happen far more quickly in King's pawn openings. It's not that Queen's pawn openings can't be tactical, it's just that one is forced to concentrate right from the start in 1. e4 openings, whereas in d4 openings it's a lot easier to go to sleep for a few moves.

It's kind of funny.

I'm a 1. d4 player. Several times I've attempted to include 1. e4 with the idea of playing faster, more tactical games for fun. What happened? 75%+ of the time I end up with a closed Ruy. a Caro, a French with closed center, a Petrov or something like that. Bah.

Originally posted by thisisbatcountry
It's kind of funny.

I'm a 1. d4 player. Several times I've attempted to include 1. e4 with the idea of playing faster, more tactical games for fun. What happened? 75%+ of the time I end up with a closed Ruy. a Caro, a French with closed center, a Petrov or something like that. Bah.

And whose fault is that? 😛