What is the best opening move:e4 or d4?

I just decided to post this topic because I had a massive debate with my chess teacher over this. He said that I am foolish to play d4, but I thought that he was a little foolish in teaching his students what I think is the wrong opening move. What do you guys think? 

P.S. Feel free to challenge me to an online game, I am not playing enough!

 Bobby Fischer wrote that 1.e4 was "best by test".

There is no best first move. 1. d4 is for positional players. 1. e4 is for the tactical.

Bobby Fischer also celebrated the 9/11 event, and claimed that all Americans should die a slow and painful death.

What a fellow!

Malarkey.

Some of the best tactical players of all time start with 1.d4 and some of the best positional players of all time start with 1.e4. Then again, to be good at positional play, one must be strong at tactics.

False. 1. d4 is more positional due to the fact that you are spending about 10-15 moves developing pawns and pieces with no sign of an immediate attack.

With 1. e4 the attack can be suddenly unleashed. 1. d4 is much, much slower.

????

And that has to do with chess because????

If I wanted to discuss psychology or politics I would go to another website.

When learning, I'd recommend trying out e4 for the more open nature of the games that tend to follow.

d4 can lead to a bit more positional games (when both players know what they are doing). Usually this involves moves where key squares and pawn breaks are part of the process, such as the minority attack on the queenside of many Queen's Gambit Declined formations.

In e4 games, piece-play is often more a central theme, so it's good for beginners to get experience with, so they get a wide variety of tactical looks to learn from.

Later on, the positional nuances of pawn and piece maneuvering can be explored for the "slower" style that can sometimes come with d4 openings.

e4 opening gives your opponent more choices of their preparations.

I agree with misshot. I play d4 because usually my opponents see it less often, and they have fewer options (other than 2. d4, i usually only see the dutch, english, indian or benoni) that I have to memorize. I often have quiet games, but iv'e also had some wild tactical ones (especially with the Indian and Benoni). 

The great hypermodern GM Richard Reti wrote in Masters of the Chessboard* that beginners should play open games exclusively until they "get a clue" (my wording, not his) and by open games he means Double KP Openings as both White and Black whenever possible. Next he recommends learning semi-open games (Single KP Openings and Double QP Openings) and finally moving on to closed games (Single QP Openings, "other" openings such as the English Opening, Reti Opening etc)

The definitions I'm using for open, semi-open and closed games are general rules of thumb with many exceptions that anyone following Reti's advice will be able to work out for themselves eventually - once they are able to recognize the characteristics of each type of position.

*You can read excerpts of the book at this link: http://www.openchessbooks.org/reti-mic/chapter1/combination.html

I am so sick and tired of seeing people say "d4 is positional, e4 is tactical."  How is this still perpetuated?  This ignorant viewpoint is everywhere on the internet.  Just look at Kasparov's d4 games and Karpov's e4 games.  Kasparov was able to unleash some excellent tactical games with the "positional" opening, and Karpov played great positional games back when he was an e4 player.  The bottom line is all players must work to develop both tactical and positional skills, and both skillsets are needed for strong play regardless of whether you play e4, d4, or Nh3 on the first move.

/rant

Yep, looked at them. The rule still holds.

That's a pretty stupid debate. There are more productive discussions to be had with a teacher. 

See #8 and #12, and don't even look at the rest.

f4.

What matters in a choice of openings is whether they lead to positions you enjoy playing (and can win). 

Do you enjoy playing against double king pawn, the sicillian, the french, and alekhines defence?  If so, then 1.e4 is the better of the two.  If you like playing against double queen pawn, the various indians, and the dutch, then the opposite is true.

Is 1.e4 more tactical?  In genera l... yes.  Is 1.d4 more positional?  Again, in general ... yes. However, the game of chess is complex enough that just about any generality you come up with, someone else can find exceptions to.

"Tactics flow from a superior position" good players understand this

The one you like the most is the best for you.

There is no better opening diffrent pople like diffrent things follow your opinion and keep playing that!