First of all, I play the Bird a lot, so I don't mean to insult it. But in the statistics, Black tends to do better than White in the Bird. These are the stats for 1. f4:
| 1.f4 | 5,158 |
|
Compare that to, for example, 1. e4 and 1. d4:
| 1.e4 | 698,468 |
|
|||
| 1.d4 | 539,251 |
|
As White, one has a small advantage to start, and statistically, it seems like the Bird throws it away. Therefore, GMs are highly unlikely to play it. However, the Bird has the advantage of relatively little opening theory, and Black still needs to be careful. At the non-master level, we make so many mistakes anyway that a few percentage points probably don't matter. Therefore, if you're comfortable with the Bird, stick with the Bird.
If the high win rate for Black concerns you at all, I would recommend that you try the Nimzo-Larsen Opening, 1. b3. It looks strange, but easily transposes into Bird lines (especially those with a queenside fianchetto) while avoiding potentially problematic lines, such as the From Gambit (1. f4 e5).
The stats for 1. b3:
HA ha ha!
f4 is a pawn move that doesn't help you to develop a piece, therefore it is bad in the master level. On that level, opening advantage matters much more than on intermediate/beginner level. 1. f4 is just not a good move.
f4 is a pawn move that doesn't help you to develop a piece, therefore it is bad in the master level. On that level, opening advantage matters much more than on intermediate/beginner level. 1. f4 is just not a good move.
Funny that you should say that...the following are all wins for White with the Bird...
B Alterman vs Deep Fritz, 2000
Lasker vs J Bauer, 1889
Bird vs Blackburne, 1879
Korchnoi vs G Goldberg, 1950
Alekhine vs NN, 1925
Capablanca vs R Portela, 1913
Chigorin vs Spielmann, 1907
Fischer vs Smyslov, 1970
Ekenberg vs Ulf Andersson (the drawing master), 1969
Aronian vs Topalov, 2006
Larsen vs Spassky, 1964
Capablanca vs I S Turover, 1931
Anyone who thinks the Bird's is a bad opening should study each of the above--at the very least, see all the famous people who have employed the Bird at the GM level with success, and all those who have been crushed by it. There are more here.
In case nobody actually wants to click links, let me show you something incredible. The great Frank James Marshall, playing as Black, losing to an NN--an NN--playing the Bird.
f4 is a pawn move that doesn't help you to develop a piece, therefore it is bad in the master level. On that level, opening advantage matters much more than on intermediate/beginner level. 1. f4 is just not a good move.
Of course it helps to develop a piece:
Because it's a not a good opening...
lol @AlexMaster
f4 is a pawn move that doesn't help you to develop a piece, therefore it is bad in the master level. On that level, opening advantage matters much more than on intermediate/beginner level. 1. f4 is just not a good move.
Funny that you should say that...the following are all wins for White with the Bird...
B Alterman vs Deep Fritz, 2000
Lasker vs J Bauer, 1889
Bird vs Blackburne, 1879
Korchnoi vs G Goldberg, 1950
Alekhine vs NN, 1925
Capablanca vs R Portela, 1913
Chigorin vs Spielmann, 1907
Fischer vs Smyslov, 1970
Ekenberg vs Ulf Andersson (the drawing master), 1969
Aronian vs Topalov, 2006
Larsen vs Spassky, 1964
Capablanca vs I S Turover, 1931
Anyone who thinks the Bird's is a bad opening should study each of the above--at the very least, see all the famous people who have employed the Bird at the GM level with success, and all those who have been crushed by it. There are more here.
In case nobody actually wants to click links, let me show you something incredible. The great Frank James Marshall, playing as Black, losing to an NN--an NN--playing the Bird.
Not necessarily saying that you're wrong, but your argument here is extremely weak. In a recent tournament, Hikaru Nakamura beat a genius (Jerry Xiong, who became a grandmaster at 14) with the Bongcloud (1. e4 e5 2. Ke2?) which may be in contention for one of the top 10 worst openings in chess.
Simply put, the Bird's opening is a sub-par opening that can work if your opponents are newer players with weak fundamentals. Against strong players, it's almost an invitation to get barraged by a strong attack, and as aforementioned it doesn't help develop any minor or major pieces (unless you're trying to bring your king to f2).
It may just be a fad. A few years ago no one played the London System. Then Magnus starts playing it and you can't play a closed game without your opponent playing Bf4.
whenever my opponent plays something like the bird, the dutch or the kings gambit against me i think wow thank you for the free game.
Agadmator does a fun game: "That Awkward Moment When Your Wife Plays 1.f4 Against You & Crushes You in 23 Moves!"
Bird Opening. She just crushes him. Check it out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qY05wg3ooqI
============
BTW, Bent Larsen had success with it. However he himself said that he didn't think much of the opening, but that his opponents didn't know it well enough to play against it well. He (and perhaps others on that list?) used is as a surprise weapon.
This post is so old...
This post is so old...
Wow, I didn't even realize. It was in those recommended posts on the side of my screen when I was doing the daily puzzle so I came and checked it out. I wonder why it was there.
This post is so old...
Wow, I didn't even realize. It was in those recommended posts on the side of my screen when I was doing the daily puzzle so I came and checked it out. I wonder why it was there.
You seem to have bumped this.
How it would get in the forum listing without a bump is beyond me. Maybe chess.com nabobs can answer this.
f4 is a pawn move that doesn't help you to develop a piece, therefore it is bad in the master level. On that level, opening advantage matters much more than on intermediate/beginner level. 1. f4 is just not a good move.
Funny that you should say that...the following are all wins for White with the Bird...
B Alterman vs Deep Fritz, 2000
Lasker vs J Bauer, 1889Bird vs Blackburne, 1879Korchnoi vs G Goldberg, 1950Alekhine vs NN, 1925Capablanca vs R Portela, 1913Chigorin vs Spielmann, 1907Fischer vs Smyslov, 1970Ekenberg vs Ulf Andersson (the drawing master), 1969Aronian vs Topalov, 2006Larsen vs Spassky, 1964Capablanca vs I S Turover, 1931Anyone who thinks the Bird's is a bad opening should study each of the above--at the very least, see all the famous people who have employed the Bird at the GM level with success, and all those who have been crushed by it. There are more here.
In case nobody actually wants to click links, let me show you something incredible. The great Frank James Marshall, playing as Black, losing to an NN--an NN--playing the Bird.
That's extremely thin and old games.
that larsen vs spassky game from 1964 is one of my favorites.
1.f4 is a fine opening but its easier to misplay than other lines and like many hypermodern openings, black can play almost any formation agaisnt it, he doesnt have to take the "bait" of trying to refute you or get a big advantage either with some d5 line or the from's gambit.
for example after 1.f4 b6!? what exactly is white's route to advantage here? i can even play f5 later on and keep things pretty symmetrical, and if you try to tranpose to some e4 line, you get an inferior line where f4 is premature. Sure you are not worse but you just get to play your quirk and so does black with equality.
not to mention that with the bird , you always have to keep up with the latest attempt to prove some small advantage by theory, if you misplay it and try to always go for natural play you will find lines where white ends up slightly worse.
but hey im not judging, i love my offbeat openings , especially my 1.b4. Im just telling you why 1.f4 is neglected by most masters. its more like a pet project for a few maverick masters and an occasional side weapon by many others
oh come on !! its such a great opening, gives aggresive and attactive chance to both sides.. more often than not we get winners in such a game rather than having those boring draws!! any particular reason why masters doesnt opt for this !!