- Blind mode tutorial
lichess.org
Donate

Best opening for White after e4 e5 ?!

#2

Win margin tells nothing about an opening, it tells something about the players playing it.

Win margin tells nothing about an opening, it tells something about the players playing it.
#3

@tpr said in #2:

Win margin tells nothing about an opening, it tells something about the players playing it.
Yes. How much they win with it... :)

@tpr said in #2: > Win margin tells nothing about an opening, it tells something about the players playing it. Yes. How much they win with it... :)
#4

The better player wins more than the weaker player.
The opening that the better player happens to play has a higher win margin.
If the better player happens to play another opening, then that opening gets a higher win margin.
The win margin of the Scotch was low, until Kasparov took it up and other strong players followed.
The win margin of the Berlin was low, until Kramnik picked it up and other strong players followed.
The win margin of the London was low, until Kramnik, Jobava and other strong players picked it up.
The win margin of the Giuoco Piano or Italian was low, until Caruana picked it up and other strong players followed.
Win margin just tells what is fashionable among strong players.

The better player wins more than the weaker player. The opening that the better player happens to play has a higher win margin. If the better player happens to play another opening, then that opening gets a higher win margin. The win margin of the Scotch was low, until Kasparov took it up and other strong players followed. The win margin of the Berlin was low, until Kramnik picked it up and other strong players followed. The win margin of the London was low, until Kramnik, Jobava and other strong players picked it up. The win margin of the Giuoco Piano or Italian was low, until Caruana picked it up and other strong players followed. Win margin just tells what is fashionable among strong players.
#5

OK, just one more, I promise. This one is stupid. It's the Center Game, 2. exd4, a kind of reverse Scandinavian colors reversed, with an extra tempo.

assuming you meant 2. d4, not 2. exd4

> OK, just one more, I promise. This one is stupid. It's the Center Game, 2. exd4, a kind of reverse Scandinavian colors reversed, with an extra tempo. assuming you meant 2. d4, not 2. exd4
#7

I think you've mostly demonstrated that opening theory is kind of pointless below a certain level.

Filter your database to higher level games and you'll see a radically different picture. For instance in the Lichess masters database after 1. e4 e5 2. d4 black is already outperforming white (+32% =34% -34%). Even in the regular database, if you filter to 2500+ and rapid or slower, black is again outperforming (+45% =9% -46%).

The whole reason opening theory becomes relevant is because as ratings increase, players become more and more capable of converting ever smaller edges into a win. But at lower ratings, the evaluation will wildly swing back and forth, and so familiarity with positions is going to play a much larger role than the objective evaluation of those positions.

I think the main reason to play "proper" openings at a lower level is because the structures they expose you to are the foundation of strategic play. If somebody just plays the e.g. BDG then they can see rapid gains at a lower level, but once they reach a level where their opponents are also competent at dealing with it, then they're going to hit a serious wall because it's not an especially sound opening. And when they swap from the BDG to e.g. the Spanish they're probably going to see their rating plummet because it's like an entirely new world.

I think you've mostly demonstrated that opening theory is kind of pointless below a certain level. Filter your database to higher level games and you'll see a radically different picture. For instance in the Lichess masters database after 1. e4 e5 2. d4 black is already outperforming white (+32% =34% -34%). Even in the regular database, if you filter to 2500+ and rapid or slower, black is again outperforming (+45% =9% -46%). The whole reason opening theory becomes relevant is because as ratings increase, players become more and more capable of converting ever smaller edges into a win. But at lower ratings, the evaluation will wildly swing back and forth, and so familiarity with positions is going to play a much larger role than the objective evaluation of those positions. I think the main reason to play "proper" openings at a lower level is because the structures they expose you to are the foundation of strategic play. If somebody just plays the e.g. BDG then they can see rapid gains at a lower level, but once they reach a level where their opponents are also competent at dealing with it, then they're going to hit a serious wall because it's not an especially sound opening. And when they swap from the BDG to e.g. the Spanish they're probably going to see their rating plummet because it's like an entirely new world.
#8

I am glad you didn't think I was promoting the Wayward Queen Attack as the true path to enlightenment :)

And thanks for reading and adding your own input!

I am glad you didn't think I was promoting the Wayward Queen Attack as the true path to enlightenment :) And thanks for reading and adding your own input!
#9

@OhNoMyPants said in #7:

I think you've mostly demonstrated that opening theory is kind of pointless below a certain level.
Also let's not forget that majority of the games those stats are from are blitz and bullet. Vast majority if you add fast rapid.

@OhNoMyPants said in #7: > I think you've mostly demonstrated that opening theory is kind of pointless below a certain level. Also let's not forget that majority of the games those stats are from are blitz and bullet. Vast majority if you add fast rapid.
#10

Bullet was excluded from the Explorer stats. And if I exclude Blitz there are too few games in the database. However, I did check after the fact with players rated 2000+, Rapid or slower and just year 2025. Guess what? d4 has the highest win margin, followed closely by Nc3.

In fact I had to use just data from 2500+ to get Black to slightly win more games with d4. And at that rating there are so few games that the stats gets skewed. Qf3 wins 2 out of 3 times in 71 games, for example :D.

Bullet was excluded from the Explorer stats. And if I exclude Blitz there are too few games in the database. However, I did check after the fact with players rated 2000+, Rapid or slower and just year 2025. Guess what? d4 has the highest win margin, followed closely by Nc3. In fact I had to use just data from 2500+ to get Black to slightly win more games with d4. And at that rating there are so few games that the stats gets skewed. Qf3 wins 2 out of 3 times in 71 games, for example :D.