The First Move Advantage in Chess
Just how big is the first move advantage in chess? This question has been around almost as long as chess itself. From the early days of the game, strong players overwhelmingly believed that the first player to move had some advantage, though it wasn't clear how big this advantage was. Most importantly, it was realized this advantage wasn't enough to ruin the game: Black won plenty of games even at the highest levels, a fact that remains true to this day.
There are several different theories about just how much of an edge White has in chess. The following list is ordered more or less in the order of the popularity of the theories, with the most widely-held beliefs coming first. However, it's important to note that without solving chess, it's impossible to say what the ultimate result of the "perfect" game of chess would be.
A Slight Edge…But Not Enough
By far, the most common belief over the last century or more among strong chess players is that while White does have an edge, it is not enough to force a win with optimal play. This theory was likely first formalized by Wilhelm Steinitz , and has generally been agreed upon by nearly every strong player, including luminaries such as Garry Kasparov, Bobby Fischer, Jose Raul Capablanca and Emanuel Lasker.
In practical terms, most top players have taken this to mean that White should play for a win, but that Black can draw with proper play. To put in another way, most players would argue that White has a much larger margin for error than Black.
A few inaccuracies (or even a small mistake or two) by White are unlikely to be enough for Black to win the game; however, just one or two inaccurate moves might be enough for White, with perfect play, to score the full point.
White is Winning
A handful of famous players through the years have speculated that White's advantage is actually enough to score a victory, provided that neither player has made any mistakes. In 1939, American master Weaver Adams wrote a book titled White to Play and Win, in which he proposed that 1. e4 should lead to a win.
More recently, World Correspondence Chess World Champion (and International Master in over-the-board chess) Hans Berliner has suggested that 1. d4 is a winning move for White. However, his statement was slightly more measured, saying that in some lines, it's possible that not every Black defense can be refuted; even in these lines, though, Berliner believes that White should have a serious edge and be on the verge of winning.
However, these are definitely minority opinions among strong chess players. Both Adams and Berliner have taken extreme criticism for their claims, and neither seems to have been able to adequately demonstrate the correctness of their views.
Black has Equality
In a sense, one could say that this theory is much more popular than "White is winning," as conceding that the game is probably drawn with best play is essentially saying that the opening position is effectively equal. However, while most players agree that White has at the very least a practical advantage, some have argued that even this isn't true, and that Black is at least on equal footing with White.
For instance, Andras Adorjan has written a number of books and other works that advocate the idea that "Black is OK," stating that black has nothing to worry about as long as the right opening lines are played. In Adorjan's view, the idea of White having an advantage is simply engrained into chess culture with no actual evidence to back it up. Others have pointed out that it's perfectly possible for Black to be theoretically equal, but for White to still have an advantage in practical terms even in the lines in which Black can draw.
Another way of looking at the situation is that of dynamic equality. In this view, Black may not have to fight for equality out of the opening, but should instead look to create dynamic chances and play for a win every bit as much as White does. While in some openings, Black may have to play for true equality, at other times Black can play for a dynamic balance, in which both sides may play for a win by focusing on different aspects of the position.
Still other writers note that Black may simply have different advantages than White. In this view, Black has some psychological advantages, as White usually feels that they must play for a win, and thus overextends when trying to win. In addition, Black may be able to claim an advantage in the fact that, since White moves first, Black has more information at their disposal when it is their turn to make a move.
There are several different theories about just how much of an edge White has in chess. The following list is ordered more or less in the order of the popularity of the theories, with the most widely-held beliefs coming first. However, it's important to note that without solving chess, it's impossible to say what the ultimate result of the "perfect" game of chess would be.
A Slight Edge…But Not Enough
By far, the most common belief over the last century or more among strong chess players is that while White does have an edge, it is not enough to force a win with optimal play. This theory was likely first formalized by Wilhelm Steinitz , and has generally been agreed upon by nearly every strong player, including luminaries such as Garry Kasparov, Bobby Fischer, Jose Raul Capablanca and Emanuel Lasker.
In practical terms, most top players have taken this to mean that White should play for a win, but that Black can draw with proper play. To put in another way, most players would argue that White has a much larger margin for error than Black.
A few inaccuracies (or even a small mistake or two) by White are unlikely to be enough for Black to win the game; however, just one or two inaccurate moves might be enough for White, with perfect play, to score the full point.
White is Winning
A handful of famous players through the years have speculated that White's advantage is actually enough to score a victory, provided that neither player has made any mistakes. In 1939, American master Weaver Adams wrote a book titled White to Play and Win, in which he proposed that 1. e4 should lead to a win.
More recently, World Correspondence Chess World Champion (and International Master in over-the-board chess) Hans Berliner has suggested that 1. d4 is a winning move for White. However, his statement was slightly more measured, saying that in some lines, it's possible that not every Black defense can be refuted; even in these lines, though, Berliner believes that White should have a serious edge and be on the verge of winning.
However, these are definitely minority opinions among strong chess players. Both Adams and Berliner have taken extreme criticism for their claims, and neither seems to have been able to adequately demonstrate the correctness of their views.
Black has Equality
In a sense, one could say that this theory is much more popular than "White is winning," as conceding that the game is probably drawn with best play is essentially saying that the opening position is effectively equal. However, while most players agree that White has at the very least a practical advantage, some have argued that even this isn't true, and that Black is at least on equal footing with White.
For instance, Andras Adorjan has written a number of books and other works that advocate the idea that "Black is OK," stating that black has nothing to worry about as long as the right opening lines are played. In Adorjan's view, the idea of White having an advantage is simply engrained into chess culture with no actual evidence to back it up. Others have pointed out that it's perfectly possible for Black to be theoretically equal, but for White to still have an advantage in practical terms even in the lines in which Black can draw.
Another way of looking at the situation is that of dynamic equality. In this view, Black may not have to fight for equality out of the opening, but should instead look to create dynamic chances and play for a win every bit as much as White does. While in some openings, Black may have to play for true equality, at other times Black can play for a dynamic balance, in which both sides may play for a win by focusing on different aspects of the position.
Still other writers note that Black may simply have different advantages than White. In this view, Black has some psychological advantages, as White usually feels that they must play for a win, and thus overextends when trying to win. In addition, Black may be able to claim an advantage in the fact that, since White moves first, Black has more information at their disposal when it is their turn to make a move.
