Whenever I play someone for the first time, I always make a very quick judge their skill level from the very first move they make. Should they move their rooks’ pawn first, I judge them as novice players and I use arrogance to intimidate their game.
I have tried to figure out why a person would move the rooks’ pawn first, and the conclusion that comes to me is that they are trying to get the rook into play as soon as possible.
But what about your other pieces. Even thought the rook is a more powerful piece, in the first few moves the bishop has a lot more influence then the rook does. If you make your first move the Kings pawn or the Queens pawn this will free up your bishop to it can move and take control of the center of the board.
Then after you move your knight you have a lot of power around the center of the board. In three moves you can have your pawn, bishop and knight influencing the middle of the board. This will set you up in a much more powerful position to dominate your opponent.
So while a beginner is wasting his moves to try and get one powerful piece into action, develop your pieces faster and you have set up a winning position for yourself.
I won the state championship in high school, so while I’m not a master, I’m decent. My take on rook’s pawn openings is different. Although it is often too get the rooks out (and inevitably leads to being up the exchange immediately simply by moving the corresponding center pawn), more often than not after the rook’s pawn is moved, the rook stays put.
In my opinion, it’s a purely psychological phenomenon. A rookie player rarely goes on the offensive; they play safe. In this case a pawn on the rook file is “out of harm’s way.”
Also, some rookies think pushing the center pawns exposes their king and is therefore risky.