How much does the first move matter?

P.S. your diagram is an illustration of zugzwang: the only instance where a tempi is a disadvantage. With proper planning, white (or black) can choose to relinquish the tempi by playing a waste move: a move that accomplishes nothing but to take up a move.

jp_23, sorry, but I don't get the point of your comment (#45) at all. 

I meant that your engine's definition of the best opening may be different from your definition. Because black has every disadvantage in opening A, black will very rarely play 1 ... g5 after white plays 1 d4. This makes the opening unlikely to occur, as there are better options for black. Your engine may recognize the disadvantages that black has in opening A and, since it's the worst possible move for black, consider it to be the best possible move that black can make in white's favor. Consequently, it is the best opening for white.

Okay. I get it. Yes, I'm quite sure that's why. However, I don't think the engine expects Black to fall for a Fool's Mate. 

But why are you telling me this?

It's what came to my mind when Arctor suggested that your engine was broken. (post18). I tried to explain why your engine would reccomend these openings while they've hardly ever been used in higher level play. I guess I didn't really answer your original question though. The first moves of a chess game are tremendously important as they dictate which pieces will become dominant and which will become useless. It also affects strategy. A defensive opeining, for example, may tempt you to trade more often than you're used to. As the openings are important, the first move of the opening is very important. If you do the opening's moves out of order, you may end up messing your opening up. Consider the Blackburne Gambit:

@jp_23: in the blue line of your diagram in post #47 it is black who wins.

In the last diagramof post # 49, Black can draw with 2...Kf6

???

Thanks, jp_23. 

Oh. It took me a few variations, but I see it now. And after I explained it so well.... No wonder I've been drawing most of those games

 Is it not possible that the starting position is a zugzwang? Experience suggests otherwise but it's not beyond the realm of possibility

Bobby and Nigel are very unlikely to be wrong because they have a very high level of understanding of the subject in question. Yes I understand your argument, but it's wrong in my opinion (and that of most others).

It's true that a small advantage can sometimes lead to a win in high-level chess, but not as small an advantage as one tempo, unless the opponent makes a traceable error. You cannot lose a game of chess without making a traceable error, that's more or less accepted.

BTW, if it turns out that you're right and almost everyone else is wrong, then that would mean that all of existing chess opening theory is bunk and would have to be re-evaluated from scratch. Opening theory is based on the idea of how can black neutralise white's tempo advantage, and how can white sustain it for long enough to increase the chance of black doing something sub-optimal which gives white a bigger advantage, possibly a winning one.

madhacker, imagine we had this discussion 500 years ago, and you argued in the same manner as you do now, claiming something, because so-and-so said so (so-and-so being the greatest chess players of the time). Would this be a good argument. No, it wouldn't. Things change over time, we learn new things, and the greatest chess players of today might shake their heads at those claims. If this is correct, then it's certainly also possible that the greatest chess players in the year 2,500 would shake their heads at Bobby's and Nigel's claim. I'm not saying they would, I'm saying it's possible. That's why a so-called argument from authority isn't really an argument with much weight.

i dont think moves matter at all!/by this i mean random moves.

it is how you "Read" the position at hand.

checkmate is who ever "sees" the line first!

that is why an opponent will resign.

because he see what you see.

My argument isn't to blindly follow Bobby and Nigel (if I blindly followed some of Bobby and Nigel's other opinions on life and the universe, I might have some issues ). I just quoted them as authorative sources to back me up. I'd be interested if you can find any authoratitive sources to back yourself up.

Yes, we're learning more and more about chess. The computer revolution has been a big jump. And things are pointing more and more in the direction of a drawn game - as the standard goes up, more ane more games are drawn. Top players are agreeing early draws. Computers are assessing theoretical positions as nearly equal, and only changing those assessments once a player makes a traceable error.

I don't deny that it's possible (just) that chess might be a win for white, but it's so incredibly unlikely that it is to all intents and purposes a non-starter. All the evidence (and the common sense understanding of any 2000+ player) points in the opposite direction.

No, I don't have any "authoritative sources", and I don't think such sources are worth anything. I believe in empirical findings and good arguments. To me it doesn't matter who supplies these findings and/or arguments. 

As far as I know there is no evidence supporting the claim that chess is a drawn game. If there is, please point me to it. Thanks. 

A databse search of games where both players were 2200+ (doesn't include any games before 1956 due to chessbase limitations, thus there are quite a few strong players missing):

1,465,916 games - White wins 34.2%, 40.9% Drawn, Black wins 24.9%

cigoL, an advantage is often not enough to win. Consider the following position, it's drawn no matter who has the move (actually, it would be interesting to see what your computer has to say about it)

It will be found that white is in zugswang: every move tips his hand...

I'll let the machine "look" at your position when I get a chance. The machine I'm now on cannot do this.

It's not zugzwang. As long as white maintains the pin by staying on the same diagonal, the trailing black bishop cannot move off of it's file or the pinned rook is taken. Of course, K+R vs K+B is a draw unless the side with the rook can capture the bishop or has an immediate checkmate (because the bishop can keep the opposing king off of checkmating squares).