(UTC)
  ChessPub Forum › Chess Publishing Openings › Flank Openings › Bird's › Merits of 1.f4.
(Moderators: Hadron, proustiskeen)
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Merits of 1.f4. (Read 49009 times)
BirdBrain
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 168
Joined: 05/29/09
Re: Merits of 1.f4.
Reply #12 - 12/23/09 at 14:50:58
Post Tools
HgMan wrote on 12/23/09 at 13:01:33:
This is all getting a little silly.  1.f4 is not the best move on the board.  It is played as a viable option for Black in the Dutch in order to play for e7-e5, which White has prevented with his/her first move.  1.f4 makes less sense: why not play 1.e4 and have done with it?  On these grounds, it's not terribly logical.

Having said that, 1.f4 has some bite against an unprepared opponent, and has the added benefit that few average players have a planned response, which probably offers some practical value to the first player in adopting this.  If your opponent is susceptible to blunt kingside attacks, then it can be a formidable weapon.  The relative absence of established theory also makes this fun for the creative player.

Does it win outright?  No.  Does it lose outright?  No.  Does it yield White much of an advantage?  Not against a stronger opponent (but what does?).  Will it stunt your chess development?  I'm not sure playing legal moves at the board is ever really going to do that, although 1.f4 rarely offers the kinds of open games developing players ought to work with.

I used to play this in correspondence chess, but moved away from it after it became increasingly difficult to beat equal or lesser opposition (I did win some very nice games along the way, however).  If I ever returned to otb chess, I would consider using it again as a means of avoiding tons of theory.  My feeling is that it fits into the category of letting the better chess player play for a win (this requires a good understanding of the game, however).


One small thing to consider, however...let's say that White is not aiming for an early e4...not all 1. f4 systems revolve around this manner of play.  Don't get me wrong - I personally like the option of playing for e4, but there are other routes...and another thing to consider is that if White plays 1. e4 and is met with 1...e5, then 2. f4 gives Black the option of playing into the KGA, which might not be in White's interests...once again, slight nuances that make the difference.
This kind of thought can be seen in the Stonewall, where White (or Black) purposefully holds back the e-pawn from advancing two squares, in order to strengthen the d- and f- pawns, which gives him a firmer grip of activity in the center of the board.  Of course, as you mentioned, he may not get the quicker advantages that he would get in 1. e4 or 1. d4, but if White prefers those kinds of games, then he should take them up.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BirdBrain
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 168
Joined: 05/29/09
Re: Merits of 1.f4.
Reply #11 - 12/23/09 at 14:45:58
Post Tools
Paul123 wrote on 12/22/09 at 22:17:52:
Markovich wrote on 12/19/09 at 03:48:35:
kylemeister wrote on 12/18/09 at 21:19:19:
I can't help but be reminded of Joel Benjamin, in an instalment of "Ask Joel," telling a lower-rated (as in around average) player who was playing the Bird that he should "stop immediately."


My thought precisely.


I think Gm Danielson or even the great GM Larsen  would disagree. Seems to me if something is wrong with  1.f4 then something is wrong with 1.c4 or even 1...c5 or 1...f5


I was going to get into this argument, but stopped...the forum is totally shifting from the original purpose, and I am totally cool with that.  The philosophy behind 1. c4 and 1. f4 are totally different.  1. c4 gives White the chance to fight for a stronger grip of d5 - 1. f4 gives White a chance to fight for e5 initially (not considering all the myriad of other differences).  If I listened to Morphy (as far as I have read), 1. c4 was a weak choice of opening moves...is it really weak, or a waste of time?  I don't think so...but I don't like it as well, since White is spending his first move developing on the queenside - not to my taste.  But I am positive it is a great first move for those who like it. 
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
HgMan
God Member
*****
Offline


Demand me nothing: What
you know, you know

Posts: 2330
Location: Up on Cripple Creek
Joined: 11/09/04
Gender: Male
Re: Merits of 1.f4.
Reply #10 - 12/23/09 at 13:01:33
Post Tools
This is all getting a little silly.  1.f4 is not the best move on the board.  It is played as a viable option for Black in the Dutch in order to play for e7-e5, which White has prevented with his/her first move.  1.f4 makes less sense: why not play 1.e4 and have done with it?  On these grounds, it's not terribly logical.

Having said that, 1.f4 has some bite against an unprepared opponent, and has the added benefit that few average players have a planned response, which probably offers some practical value to the first player in adopting this.  If your opponent is susceptible to blunt kingside attacks, then it can be a formidable weapon.  The relative absence of established theory also makes this fun for the creative player.

Does it win outright?  No.  Does it lose outright?  No.  Does it yield White much of an advantage?  Not against a stronger opponent (but what does?).  Will it stunt your chess development?  I'm not sure playing legal moves at the board is ever really going to do that, although 1.f4 rarely offers the kinds of open games developing players ought to work with.

I used to play this in correspondence chess, but moved away from it after it became increasingly difficult to beat equal or lesser opposition (I did win some very nice games along the way, however).  If I ever returned to otb chess, I would consider using it again as a means of avoiding tons of theory.  My feeling is that it fits into the category of letting the better chess player play for a win (this requires a good understanding of the game, however).
  
"Luck favours the prepared mind."  --Louis Pasteur
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paul123
Full Member
***
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 109
Location: USA
Joined: 11/01/03
Re: Merits of 1.f4.
Reply #9 - 12/23/09 at 02:04:38
Post Tools
Göran wrote on 12/22/09 at 23:49:18:
And we all not the status of 1.c4 according to 

KoKko wrote on 12/20/09 at 19:04:35:

...
There are 2 "weak" lines in c4 opening and these are the 1...e5 line and 1...c5.

Not only computers but humans can see after i.e. e5 nf6 nc6 Bb4 (Bc5) d6 0-0 h6 white has nothing more to offer.


Read all about it 
http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1252422477/30#30




Oh... if it were only  that simple    Roll Eyes
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Göran
Senior Member
****
Offline


ChessPublishing is great!

Posts: 454
Location: Sweden
Joined: 02/13/08
Gender: Male
Re: Merits of 1.f4.
Reply #8 - 12/22/09 at 23:49:18
Post Tools
And we all not the status of 1.c4 according to 

KoKko wrote on 12/20/09 at 19:04:35:

...

There are 2 "weak" lines in c4 opening and these are the 1...e5 line and 1...c5.

Not only computers but humans can see after i.e. e5 nf6 nc6 Bb4 (Bc5) d6 0-0 h6 white has nothing more to offer.


Read all about it 
http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1252422477/30#30
  
What kind of proof is that?
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Paul123
Full Member
***
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 109
Location: USA
Joined: 11/01/03
Re: Merits of 1.f4.
Reply #7 - 12/22/09 at 22:17:52
Post Tools
Markovich wrote on 12/19/09 at 03:48:35:
kylemeister wrote on 12/18/09 at 21:19:19:
I can't help but be reminded of Joel Benjamin, in an instalment of "Ask Joel," telling a lower-rated (as in around average) player who was playing the Bird that he should "stop immediately."


My thought precisely.


I think Gm Danielson or even the great GM Larsen  would disagree. Seems to me if something is wrong with  1.f4 then something is wrong with 1.c4 or even 1...c5 or 1...f5


 
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
nyoke
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 593
Location: BELGIUM
Joined: 12/31/06
Gender: Male
Re: Merits of 1.f4.
Reply #6 - 12/22/09 at 20:22:32
Post Tools
Still, 1. f4 is closer in spirit to 1.e4 ('open game') than 1.d4 and other flank openings such as the english and the real Reti (not the KIA). So, I don't think it's exaggerated to call it agressive, even though this means in this case something like 'not angling for pure positional play'...
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BirdBrain
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 168
Joined: 05/29/09
Re: Merits of 1.f4.
Reply #5 - 12/21/09 at 16:05:31
Post Tools
linksspringer wrote on 12/18/09 at 22:41:29:
BirdBrain wrote on 12/18/09 at 21:39:12:

Think of Davies, who gives players (like me) simple opening ideas. 


Right on cue, Davies' Flank Openings update for this month is on the Bird!  Grin
"The point is that the Bird can free up a lot of time that might currently be getting spent on opening studies; it leads to highly original positions right from the outset and has very little 'theory' to learn."


Link, thanks for the news!  I would like to see what he has to say...an original thinker with solid ideas...should be interesting.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BirdBrain
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 168
Joined: 05/29/09
Re: Merits of 1.f4.
Reply #4 - 12/21/09 at 16:04:44
Post Tools
It's okay, guys.  I know the Bird won't win popularity contests...and I understand that.  But the point of this forum was not to say whether 1. f4 is subjective to other openings...please, that belongs in a different forum.  Opening-bashing is narrow-minded...ask Spassky, who used the "inferior" King's Gambit.  I guess he would play 2. e4 against the From's Gambit!  Smiley  Anyway, right now I am thinking about the idea 1. f4 e5 2. fxe d6 3. exd Bxd 4. Nf3 Nf6 5. d4 0-0 (if ...Ng4, obviously 6. Qd3, but I am not a huge fan of leaving f2 so "weak") 6. e4!? with an aggressive position.  Anybody have any comments concerning this idea?  Another plausible idea is the natural 6. Bg5...
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: Merits of 1.f4.
Reply #3 - 12/19/09 at 03:48:35
Post Tools
kylemeister wrote on 12/18/09 at 21:19:19:
I can't help but be reminded of Joel Benjamin, in an instalment of "Ask Joel," telling a lower-rated (as in around average) player who was playing the Bird that he should "stop immediately."


My thought precisely.
  
The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
linksspringer
Senior Member
****
Offline



Posts: 376
Joined: 09/25/07
Re: Merits of 1.f4.
Reply #2 - 12/18/09 at 22:41:29
Post Tools
BirdBrain wrote on 12/18/09 at 21:39:12:

Think of Davies, who gives players (like me) simple opening ideas. 


Right on cue, Davies' Flank Openings update for this month is on the Bird!  Grin
"The point is that the Bird can free up a lot of time that might currently be getting spent on opening studies; it leads to highly original positions right from the outset and has very little 'theory' to learn."
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BirdBrain
Full Member
***
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 168
Joined: 05/29/09
Re: Merits of 1.f4.
Reply #1 - 12/18/09 at 21:39:12
Post Tools
LOL...yup, that is the kind of mentality that seperates me from many chess players...so many want to be #1, but I simply enjoy chess, and I enjoy 1. f4 (in a weird sort of way!)...so I would never stop playing it, regardless if Joel could (and most certainly would) mop the floor with me.  It is part of the fun of chess - playing something that you like.  I know, this is off-topic of the From's Gambit, and I will not try to go any farther off course after this remark, otherwise we will be shifted!  OH NO!  Wink  But seriously, a GM should take into consideration WHO he is teaching, and what that player wants out of chess.  If he asked me, "Do you want to be state champ?" and I said "Yes", then maybe I can understand him giving me a good reason to not play 1. f4 (I have played against a KY state champ who plays 1. f4, BTW)...but if he asked, "Is chess nothing more than a hobby that you enjoy?" and I said "Yes" (which it is, a pleasurable hobby for me, and one that I don't spend excess time on - I like the adventure), then the classes should be given in a format that gave me the most satisfaction out of the class...after all, I am the one paying for it.  But if he chose not to teach me, then that would be his prerogative as well...and we did some of both - he would answer my questions, but then we would get into issues concerning critical pieces (hanging pieces), king safety, etc...more or less studying themes of chess, rather than openings.   

Think of Davies, who gives players (like me) simple opening ideas.  I played the Colle the other day and did rather well with it - but it is not a system I would want to play for the rest of my life.  However, it fits in somewhat with the Stonewall setup for 1. f4, so I find it reasonable to explore its ideas.  And 1. f4 games often go at the pace I prefer.  So I don't see a good reason to quit it.   

But back to the subject.  Here is what I am going to do...this weekend, I will take a look at the positions and see what I find...not that it will be Top-Notch theory, or anything...but to find a system I like...and BTW, thanks for the suggestions - that is what keeps the game of chess interesting - reading each person's different outlook on the game.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4989
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Merits of 1.f4.
12/18/09 at 21:19:19
Post Tools
I can't help but be reminded of Joel Benjamin, in an instalment of "Ask Joel," telling a lower-rated (as in around average) player who was playing the Bird that he should "stop immediately."
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 
Topic Tools
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo
 
  « Board Index ‹ Board Top  

ChessPub Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.6.12!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2026. All Rights Reserved.

Valid RSS Valid XHTML Valid CSS Powered by Perl Source Forge