TheGrobe:"One thing I've never fully understood. though, is how the Accelerated Dragon is supposed to prevent the complications that arise from the Yugoslav Attack -- the games in which my opponents have played the Accelerated Dragon have really never played out all that differently than the conventional version."

The point is that black can play d5 in one move, because he didnt play d6.

Salaskan:"Well, your main problem seems to be dealing against 2...e6, because you can just play the Rossolimo/Moscow against Nc6 and d6, respectively, and those openings are fine for white and don't have so much theory. Against 2...e6, you could simply play 3.Nc3 and transpose into a Rossolimo/Moscow if Black responds with Nc6/d6, which he usually does. If Black plays another move, for example g6 or a6, you could try a King's Indian Attack hybrid with g3, if you like a little hypermodernism, but this is quite complicated."

But isnt c3 one of the basic ideas of this systems?. By playing Nc3 i cannot do it anymore. King's indian is not for me, so Bb5 system is not practical, pity coz i am spanish player. And wing gambit seems to be unsound to me:)

Many of u suggested morra gambit, i played it for many months, but i think it is no as good as it is supposed to be. Just take siberian trap, i checked many lines and i wouldnt like to play any of them. Black can transpose it to alapin as well, and many people do that, so morra isnt the answer, i am searching system which wont allow such transpositions.

To sum up i will probably stick to alapin:), but this decision isnt final.

I think the gambit's better than you give it credit for. It might not be your style, but it's a fun and (probably) sound gambit. And even if it is unsound, it's close enough for amateurs like us.

I agree with the sentiment about the Morra Gambit being weak.  IMO, most of its popularity is due not to its merits, but solely because Ken Smith spent decades tirelessly telling people how great it was, regardless of his actual results.  Without him, it's another Blackmar-Diemer Gambit... you might win a few flashy games against unprepared opponents, but against someone who knows what they're doing, you're at a disadvantage.

There's a lot of good advice in this thread.  As an e4 player, I've done the shopping around of "anti-Sicilian" systems myself, and come to the conclusion that nothing works like the Open Sicilian.  Yes, you have to become familiar with playing against several different setups (e6 systems, e5 systems, g6 systems, etc.), and you'll take a lot of lumps along the way, but once you get a taste for it, there's nothing like a good Sicilian for an exciting game.  Isn't that why we play e4 in the first place?

THe antidote to the Sicilian is played 1.d4 or 1.c4!  Or you could try playing 1.Nf3, then 2. e4.  Although the most common reply to 1.Nf3 is ...Nf6, afterwhich e4 would be a pretty bad move.

An ounce of prevention....

I still can't help but play 1. e4

I see some people talking down about the morra smith, I have to disagree. The Morra Smith is perfectly sound and I would recommend it to anyone who doesn't like playing the open Sicilian. Granted it's not the best opening theortically speaking, but it does have it's advantages. Here's a game I played against FIDE master Andey Chumachenko, I lost but I had a andvantage early in the game.

ChessBase "Big Database 2008" disagrees with you.

1.e4 > White Winning Percentage = 42% (out of 132,666)

1.d4 > White Winning Percentage = 40% (out of 069,228)

Notice that there are almost twice the number of games that start with e4 as d4...so the percentage difference is magnified in real numbers.

If Black goes into an e6 Sicilian, it can be useful to know how to play King's Indian Attack if you're comfortable in closed set ups. Black's inclination to expand with d5 and eventually d4 opens up the long diagonal for the KIA bishop.

I wouldn't recommend it against a d6/e5 Sicilian.

But this king's indian attack will be similar to one which can be used vs french defence? I am thinking about KIA vs french so if answer is yes it will be good news.

Coming to the morra, nice game pvmike, but i still think black can transpose to alapin so i should know it as well and this means morra isn't practical if i can play alapin alone:( Anyway defence black used in this game is one i use against morra gambit. Main point of it is trap if white plays automatic

And queen has to be given up. Of course black doesnt have to play h3 but this ilustrates reason of this piece placement

Yes, I've had success with the KIA against the French and a e6/d5 Sicilian setup, as they often transpose into similar lines. White needs to push e5 though to cramp Black and to tempt Black into playing d4, opening the a8/h1 diagonal. White's usual mistakes come from playing passively in his solid setup, allowing Black a build-up. Studying Fischer's use of the KIA is a good way to break out of the passive mindset. Best of luck!

Yeah if you want to play the morra you need to know the alapin as well. I started out just playing the alapin, and after awhile I added the morra-smith to my openings

I have very good experiences with the closed sicilian. Also, Sicilian players hate it.

Many people think it is a positional opening, but this is simply not true. The closed sicilian is very flexible and allows you to play positionally but you can also choose a tactical approach: I got many exciting attacks from the closed. All you need to do is learn a few basic rules of the closed, and you can start finishing of your sicilian-playing opponents!

Couldn't agree more. It's a struggle to get a bit familiair with Black's many options but once you play it more often you'll get used to it and soon you really enjoy it. Never a dull moment in a Sicilian, the Closed variation excepted imho.

So there are 3 alternatives I am thinking of: alapin, closed and rossolimo/moscow/KIA. Somehow i feel 3rd option will be the best coz i will employ KIA vs french and i play ruy lopez, which has some similarities with Bb5 sicilian.