I don't really agree that 1. e4 requires more theory than 1. d4. Against strong players it is really really tough to fight for any sort of an edge in openings like the slav now a days and without a substantial amount of subtle theory it's probably not realistically possible.
And while things like the Benko Gambit may be not so hot in slow chess, it's really not bad for blitz and if white's not well prepared he's just going to end up getting flagged since black's moves are far easier than white's to hyper-blitz out. And the Benko Gambit, at least when I was playing 1. d4 is hugely hugely popular in mid-level blitz probably because of this exact reason.
And we haven't even scratched the surface of things like the Gruenfeld, KID, Benoni, Tarrasch and then the countless offbeat but far from tepid openings like the Tchigorin, Albin Countergambit, and so on.
I find playing e4 I get, with basically no theory, the sort of comfortable slightly better positions that white can get with d4 against the queen's gambit declined pretty easily.
And while things like the Benko Gambit may be not so hot in slow chess, it's really not bad for blitz and if white's not well prepared he's just going to end up getting flagged since black's moves are far easier than white's to hyper-blitz out. And the Benko Gambit, at least when I was playing 1. d4 is hugely hugely popular in mid-level blitz probably because of this exact reason.
And we haven't even scratched the surface of things like the Gruenfeld, KID, Benoni, Tarrasch and then the countless offbeat but far from tepid openings like the Tchigorin, Albin Countergambit, and so on.
I find playing e4 I get, with basically no theory, the sort of comfortable slightly better positions that white can get with d4 against the queen's gambit declined pretty easily.
