Once you get past worrying about which color you play, you'll start focusing on what really matters...how to play the color you get.
(Though, statistically, most players have a slightly better win ratio when they play white. But forget that I said this.)
On another site that keeps colour stats, I've scored 59% (wins)as black and 57% as white in 250+ games. 14% draws in both cases. Only proves that I am weak with white, but over the board I do better with white.
It all depends on your personailty, if you are very aggresive or slightly passive. etc
Not for scrubs like us.
Only if you're playing in a western country
I seem to play better with White. Everyone does I guess.
I think that the reason why people might perfer black better is that they prefer to attack from solid positions. Maybe, for players with black preference, you guys can start with building a solid camp instead of grabbing for space as white!
I wish I were good enough to get a bump when I play White.
But I'm not.
For now I'm playing better with Black. I suspect I play a bit delusionally with White.
Everyone has a little advantage when playing white since you choose the opening you want and the oponent has to defend at first. The thing is that at low rating you normally lose the opening advantage very soon since players don't know the opening theory. Also, a thing that happens in low rating games is that if a player plays a "silly" move in move 1 (e.i. 1.a4), player with black usually doesn not know how to take advantage (specially in blitz).
Playing white is a win for sure if you are a Godmaster!
White is technically 1 tempo ahead on the start, and so black will most likely try to nullify the tempo to get a drawing position.
So yeah, technically, white has always a small advantage in the opening, that can or not disappear mid game but most likely, it's enough for white to force a mid game it desires and a positive endgame.
I think for beginners (like me), it really is easier to win the battle for control of the center with white pieces than with black. I always feel better playing openings with white. Maybe that advantage goes away once you pass a certain skill level - like once both players have solid 'memorized' opening repetoires, but then comes back at really high levels - like for players that can recognize and leverage a fraction of a pawns-worth of advantage.
Worth about 53-47%. Worth around 1/4-1/2 of a pawn or maybe 50 rating points. All of the above ( my first sentence) is subjective and approximate.
Some openings require white to take initiative in the middle game, and that the long term perspectives favor black, for example the open Sicilian. It can be tricky for the white player to handle
The SlowChess archive shows a definite advantage for White.
Games %W %D %B
5622 [0.48 0.10 0.42] All Games
Most chess.com ratings in SlowChess fall between 1000-2000 and the membership is almost entirely adult from what I can tell.
Splitting the draws that puts it overall at 53%-47%.
Give Mr. Chess2Knights a cigar!
I am persuaded that playing White is an advantage at all ratings with, of course, individual exceptions.
Here's Wojo's record:
1180 [0.36 0.43 0.21] All Games
Which works out to 57.5%-42.5%. He was a killer with the White pieces, especially when he opened 1.Nf3.
568 [0.49 0.41 0.10] 1. Nf3
I don't know if other players can glom onto his magic in the Wojo's Weapons books, but he sure did well with that Catalan/Fianchetto system.
Not sure why it would be the "complete" opposite. That's a pretty strong claim. I would say the claim about the open sicilian is pretty accurate. White needs to be pretty mindful about the fact that black has lots of gradual ways to improve his position. It doesn't mean white is worse, but that's the character of that position. And really that's the main thing: the character of the position will determine which side plays in what style. Of course playing white will usually give a boost somewhere: white gambits tend to be more potent, grinding as white is easier because he is more likely to get a small and safe advantage, etc. But it varies a lot depending on the position.
I'll believe 70% when I see it :p
I'm guessing it's something like 51% vs 49%. I don't know how to find a database like you describe. Let me know if you find / have one.
Anyway, a single tempo is a fairly sophisticated concept to a beginner. I'd say they tend to waste a tempo nearly every move (yes they develop, but if to a sub-optimal square it will need to be moved again later). I can't imagine them accidentally making use of 1 tempo by accidentally being efficient with their moves 15 times in a row (or something similar like this).
On my chess.com stats my white percentage is higher than my black percentage by around 5 percentage points (e.g., 50% of the time winning, when playing white, vs. winning 45% of the time when playing black). It doesn't seem to vary with time control. 5 percentage points sounds significant enough for me to be excited to play white, but it's not the end of the world if I play black.
newer players often think they win more as black its simply an interesting psychological phenomenon and i cant explain it. but if they actually record their games and check results they typically have overwheling higher win rate as white. the stronger the players the more equal. i can understand it myself from common sense perspective but if you doubt then seriously check empirical data.
Do you have any data at all that we could look at? I guess I'm too lazy to google it but then again you are the one who made the claim. It seems hard to believe honestly, but if it's true that would be really interesting.
How high must one's rating be for playing white to be a decided advantage? For some reason, I seem to have a better winning percentage when playing black. I guess I'm better at reacting than attacking.