Does anyone else hate 1.e4 e5?

I've hated 1.e4 e5 with a passion ever since learning how to play chess. It's so dull and boring. If I'm watching a Grandmaster game and 1.e4 e5 is played, I lose all interest in the game.

If my opponent plays 1.e4, I usually play 1...e6 (the French), but sometimes 1...d5 (the Scandanavian), and occasionally 1...c5 (the Sicilian).

As White I never play 1.e4. Usually it's 1.d4, but sometimes 1.Nf3, and occasionally 1.c4.

1.e4 e5 is a real pet peeve of mine, and I'm curious of whether anyone agrees with me here. :D

scotch and halloween gambit evans gamebit sac line in ruy and vienna you call that boring

Maybe you should learn something about the positions arising after e4 e5, then you might find them more interesting.

To all the exciting openings that come from e4 e5 I'd like to add the Fried Liver Attack.

i  agree ill never play e5 as black. i dont think itts possible 2 play a move  that hasnt been played b4.theyve been playing e4 e5 since chess has been around. against e4 i play the alakhines defense, nimzowitcsh  defense, the pirc, the robatsch, i  did play the caro khan until some1  played f4 on the 2nd move and crushed me

 So, GM White and GM Black sit down to play a game of Chess....

The game begins:         1.e4,e5

        GM White: " 'An arbitrary name' will think this game is dull and boring."

        GM Black:   " That's your fault. 'An arbitrary name' would never have played

                            1.e4 in the first place."

        GM White: " You're right. Let's give up Chess altogether. If we can't please

                          'an arbitrary name' ,why bother with Chess at all ? "

 I can understand why 1 ...e5 is considered by some boring as BLACK. In fact ...e5 is more of a positional move  not seeking as sharp counterchances. the number one drawback of the move (after all unlike the caro kann or french, it immediately advances a center pawn two squares otherwise) is that it is the one where white really dictates the type of game it will be. And it's theoretical since there are so many things white can throw at you. All of those gambits come from the white side, and there are few good ones for black. Black doesn't have as many aggressive options, and in for example the closed ruy you have to have a good positional understanding to get through them. However, if white makes some mistake, black can totally retake the initiative with a classic kingside attack as has been done by people like Alekhine against inferior players. I don't usually play the move, but I have nothing against it and it's very sound. In fact, I find it fun to challenge gambits and the play is still tactical for black since he has to find the good defensive moves against white's ideas!

Basically, everyone who is listing all those complicated lines are from the white point of view. The gambits may be fun, but not for a gambit lover playing as black. There is the latvian gambit, but it's not so great though some may not agree.

Dear Arbitrary: 

I posted a famous Morphy game here:  http://www.chess.com/forum/view/game-analysis/morphys-games.  I dare you to play it through and call it boring!!

In fact, with apologies to Arbitrary, it might be fun to turn this Forum Topic into a showcase for really interesting 1. e.4 ...e.5 games.  Anyone care to join in?

You think e4 e5 is boring? Look at the first 11 moves of this Evans Gambit game I played, it's a completely insane line. White gives up a whole Rook in an attempt to trap the Black Queen on a1.

Also true, since the symmetrical position just gives the initiative back to White.

Point is, if you think e4 e5 is boring, you need to play into more exciting stuff. Try some gambits and take some chances, it gets wild.

Without using the word "boring," I'm with arbitrary -- I'm happy to avoid 1. P-K4 P-K4. (Just wanted to see descriptive notation again.)

Chess became more fun when I began to learn some queen pawn openings, and really fun when one can unleash a 1. c4 on an unsuspecting victim.* As black, I don't remember the last time I played 1. ... e5. I had a friend who was fond of the Giuoco Piano. (yawn.) I stopped letting him play that. Now, if he pushes the King pawn, we play the opening I want to play.

---------------

* I used to use it at tournaments against sub-1500 players in particular. I'd push the c pawn, hit my clock, and look up. The look of puzzlement and consternation on the face of my opponent was usually priceless.

Double king's pawn openings only turn boring to me after the Petrov, which can be made interesting under certain circumstances, and certain lines of the Spanish. I'm always sure to make the game pretty interesting with white if I play 1.e4, though I admit that I'm going with the sicilian more nowadays than 1...e5, though I've been considering switching back.

If you whanna play fun 1. e4 e5 just play Kings Gambit 2. f4

I play it, and its a very funny opening! 

I remember in a previous thread how I used to bash 1. e4 e5, but now that I've matured as a skilled player, I've grown to love the games this opening produces.

For those who are UNAWARE:

1. e4 e5 leads to OPEN games: meaning that both sides are guaranteed smooth development of pieces, solid pawn structure, and the promise of a sharp battle to come.

These fast-paced tactical battles are anything but BORING; rather, a good number of chess players are actually AFRAID of the games that 1. e4 e5 produce, and thus try to avoid these games by searching for calmer waters, i.e. 1. d4, 1. c4, and 1. Nf3, among others.

However, SOME 1. e4 e5 games do tend to be boring, but this is more due to players incorrectly teaching beginners that 1. e4 e5 is a simple opening that players should start out with. Playing 1. e4 e5 against a more experienced player is a good way to get smashed. And if played passively, like in the following example, the game will be a boring game, typical of scholastic players and young kids who play in tournaments:

1. e4 e5 is symbolic of what chess is like OTB: sharp and dynamic play, a real-time strategic battle, full of elegance and nerves, blunders and grace under pressure.

Openings like 1. d4 and the Sicilian (1. e4 c5) serve to slowdown the game somewhat, leading to a different type of confrontation, where subtle strategy, nuanced marshaling of pieces around the board, and the slightest edge make all the difference between winning and losing. These games can be very slow, long, and drawn out: vastly different from 1. e4 e5.

Seriously, when I was a 1400 player, I fell in love with the English (1. c4). And when I upgraded to the 1500 level, I became a student of the Queen's Gambit (1. d4 d5 2. c4) and the Indian Games (1. d4 Nf6 2. c4). But now that I'm pushing 2000, I've returned to 1. e4 and 1. e4 e5 especially, seeing as I can now DESTROY 1300-1500 level players in 5-15 turns with this opening.

You gotta hate dull, slow, closed, positional queen pawn opening games like this one.

 I don't agree that 1. e4 in general is boring. Scotch game, center counter and modern defence games are much more fun then most of the dull positions arising  from 1. d4 openings.

But yes Ruy Lopez and especially Petroff defence is boring as hell.

I feel that with e4 e5 you've got 2 choices

1. Accept that the result doesn't matter to you (in which case why you are playing?) and go for a mad gambit
2. Boring Guico Piano/Ruy Lopez/other

Yeah, it was mainly the Guico Piano, Ruy Lopez, etc. that I had in mind. I should have been more specific. I agree that the gambits aren't boring.

If you think the Caro-Kann is boring, you might be doing it wrong. :P