Re: Is e4 significantly better than d4?
Posted: Sat Sep 14, 2019 5:05 am
Black has many very solid options after 1.d4. In Ragozin it's really tough to get anything. The battle ground seems to be the endgame after: cxd5/Bg5 where black goes h6/0-0/Bf5. The resulting endgame is better for white and unpleasant to play for humans as black but it's hard to imagine it's not a relatively easy draw for top engines.
In Be7 QGD the Bf4, Nbd7, c5 system seems to be critical. Again white is better but black seem to be able to defend by going to slightly worse endgames which as above are unpleasant for humans but likely an easy draw for engines.
There is also semi-tarrash, Vienna (just go Nf6 in the gambit line) and semi-slav (the most complicated one and even though it's hard to find an edge, white has many promising tries.
If white can get more in those than it gets in Berlin or anti-Marshall or d3 Spanish (maybe better option than the main line) or Italian is an open question. My view is that it's probably easier to make an opening book which will never lose even with current software/hardware against 1.d4 than it is against 1.e4. On the other hand I like 1.d4 more for human play because black gets little to no counterplay in the critical lines while in 1.e4 if you want to get something you need to allow pretty complicated position.
Btw, I think 1.e4 book with up to date theory written by a very competent (in both chess and analysis) player is long overdue. The market is flooded with hacks. I don't buy chess books anymore (Leela + 2080ti produces much better results in a few minutes than even the most respected books) but I will make an exception for this one (as long as I can somehow buy an electronic version). Best of luck Larry, I am curious to see some of the recommendations mainly against serious but not the very main openings (Caro/French/Janish Gambit if you're recommending Spanish).
In Be7 QGD the Bf4, Nbd7, c5 system seems to be critical. Again white is better but black seem to be able to defend by going to slightly worse endgames which as above are unpleasant for humans but likely an easy draw for engines.
There is also semi-tarrash, Vienna (just go Nf6 in the gambit line) and semi-slav (the most complicated one and even though it's hard to find an edge, white has many promising tries.
If white can get more in those than it gets in Berlin or anti-Marshall or d3 Spanish (maybe better option than the main line) or Italian is an open question. My view is that it's probably easier to make an opening book which will never lose even with current software/hardware against 1.d4 than it is against 1.e4. On the other hand I like 1.d4 more for human play because black gets little to no counterplay in the critical lines while in 1.e4 if you want to get something you need to allow pretty complicated position.
Btw, I think 1.e4 book with up to date theory written by a very competent (in both chess and analysis) player is long overdue. The market is flooded with hacks. I don't buy chess books anymore (Leela + 2080ti produces much better results in a few minutes than even the most respected books) but I will make an exception for this one (as long as I can somehow buy an electronic version). Best of luck Larry, I am curious to see some of the recommendations mainly against serious but not the very main openings (Caro/French/Janish Gambit if you're recommending Spanish).