Why lower rated players should learn bird's opening

Your statements which I highlighted in red are simply not true.

I wrote an article which discusses the activity of first moves.

I will provide you with the link below incase you wish to read it:

http://www.chess.com/blog/X_PLAYER_J_X/the-most-active-move-at-move-1

If you don't feel like reading the article that is ok.

If I was to sum up the discussion of the article in response to your post.

I would simply say the move 1.f4 does hit a center square.

However, the only piece which is developed from the move 1.f4 is the king.

No other piece is active from this first move.

Compared to other possible first moves 1.f4 it is not the best.

However, It is not the worse either.

If I was to give you a quick example showing how it is not the best or not the worse it would be with the following 2 moves.

1.e4   and  1.a3

The move 1.e4  hits the center similar to the move 1.f4

However, 1.e4 is more active because it activates a bishop and the queen.

The move 1.f4 only activates the king to 1 square (the f2 square).

Which is not a great accomplishment.

The move 1.a3  does not hit the center which gives 1.f4 a slight edge over 1.a3 simply because it does hit a center square.

The move 1.a3 does not develop alot of pieces only 1 square for the rook.

In return 1.f4 only develops 1 square for the king.

As you can see 1.e4 would be more active than 1.f4

1.f4 would be more active than 1.a3

lol

The biggest criticism of 1.f4 is perhaps the lack of early development of pieces according to classical theory.

The more modern theory is that development is all about having the right pawn structure because it's pointless to get pieces out if they can't do anything.

According to classical theory, bird's opening is not very goood at development.  But pawn structure wise, in both the static and dynamic sense, those who play bird's opening would argue that it is decent. 

X_PLAYER_J_X wrote:

wirebolt wrote:

Even though you open up the diagonal to your king, 1. f4 gives White large control of the centre and encourages development of pieces. You can do it if you have the proper follow up moves.

Your statements which I highlighted in red are simply not true.

I wrote an article which discusses the activity of first moves.

I will provide you with the link below incase you wish to read it:

http://www.chess.com/blog/X_PLAYER_J_X/the-most-active-move-at-move-1

If you don't feel like reading the article that is ok.

If I was to sum up the discussion of the article in response to your post.

I would simply say the move 1.f4 does hit a center square.

However, the only piece which is developed from the move 1.f4 is the king.

No other piece is active from this first move.

Compared to other possible first moves 1.f4 it is not the best.

However, It is not the worse either.

If I was to give you a quick example showing how it is not the best or not the worse it would be with the following 2 moves.

1.e4   and  1.a3

The move 1.e4  hits the center similar to the move 1.f4

However, 1.e4 is more active because it activates a bishop and the queen.

The move 1.f4 only activates the king to 1 square (the f2 square).

Which is not a great accomplishment.

The move 1.a3  does not hit the center which gives 1.f4 a slight edge over 1.a3 simply because it does hit a center square.

The move 1.a3 does not develop alot of pieces only 1 square for the rook.

In return 1.f4 only develops 1 square for the king.

As you can see 1.e4 would be more active than 1.f4

1.f4 would be more active than 1.a3

Good argument. f4 certainly isn't as good as e4 or d4 for developing your pieces.

Not 100% perfect, as there are a couple of instances that I allowed drawing lines with a Rxh2 sac, but generally, Fritz says I maintained a big lead throughout the game.  I am gonna provide my commentary, along with Fritz's ideas.

One thing I don't like about imputting a game is that sometimes, even if you type AND retype notes on a move, it WILL NOT post it!  ANNOYING!

What is considered low rated?

That's what I was wondering...

I would like to comment on the Bird opening as a low rated,casual player who is now retired and wishes to become better at chess.

I have tried the Colle, the KIA, and the English. I was attracted to the Bird because the development occurs across the board.I have played it a few times and find that some pieces are blocked throughout the development and it is hard to get "clean" development of the bishops and knights.

I know I need to keep working at the opening. However, more skilled players need to remember that you can never count on your opponent(at my level) to make a sane move! Forget about following a development line.

So I am still looking for that "perfect" opening. But of course I know you have all been in my shoes at some point!

This was a game I might have been fortunate to win, but that isn't the point of this post.  It is a slight change-up in the ...Bg4 line, and I had an interesting idea I got to cover.  I will only discuss up to a certain point, as that is where my interest is in - discussing part of the opening theory, to gain a good position with White.

@BirdBrain

25.Bb3    might of made your job a little easier to convert the win.

Are you referring to my e4 idea?  If so, please provide your personal system.

I will state that Fritz doesn't view e4 as a mistake, but likes Nc3 or e3 better.  However, I like to gain space, and it is not a losing move - it still gives White a playable game, with extra space.  

You are correct!  One of my biggest weaknesses is sometimes overlooking the simplest tactics, even like that.  I get my mind focused on concepts in game and miss out on things that sometimes weaker players see.  With that said, what are your thoughts on the opening ideas?  Whether I won or lost that game, I think the opening experiment was good. 

Good game. How could blunder your opponent just blunder away his bishop like that.

Petrosian, my thoughts are that although those lines are fully playable, they allow more attacking chances on White's kingside.  I think from a positional standpoint, White gets opportunities to play for an endgame in the e4 lines. 

I remember learning quite a bit about From's Gambit by watching linkspringger back in the day, and he would play the structure you are referencing (he was about 2500 on here).  I tried it a few times, without satisfaction.  That being said, it isn't that it is bad - but that at the moment, I like e4 more.

Consider my ideas...wouldn't you debate that although the position is objectively equal, White has chances to play for a good endgame?

Probably due to time crunch.  I cannot remember.  It happens to all of us.  Better yet, how could I miss Bb3?  LOL

skotheim2 wrote:

Thanks for writing about my comment, Birdbrain. I've played some interesting games like that, where I used the Bird opening and trounced other players.

I think as Stefan Buecker put it - "if you understand the position better than your opponent, you are more likely to win the game".  It goes for 1. f4 as well as any other opening - understanding the ideas. 

Short time gratification (some win against low rated players) instead hard work and getting stronger, is a good way to stay low rated. What makes the Bird Opening appealing is that simple a strategy is to attack the king and a very limited pawn structure, a ambition player cannot expect to grow and improve with such limited opening repertoire. I see in my chess club players who played Colle, London system , English opening, Reti opening, Larsen Attack 1.b3 and Bird opening and a low rated player playing this type opening will never reach a competent rating of 1800 otb; there is a reason why. To beome competent player you need to play 1.e4 first, you learn how to handle different centers, pawn structures, piece placement, open and close position, ambition player will become proficient all area of chess. Ruy Lopez is the education in how play chess, even the Russian know this, not the Bird opening. There was a player who ask for my help, I suggested to study tactics, Modern Chess Strategy by Pachman and play only 1.e4, his rating went up four hundred points, from 1400 uscf to 1800 uscf. Every experts and masters I know have played 1.e4 first and than play other thing later, even Tony Miles has played 1.e4 first.