Wait hold on...
There are 3 types of lies.
Lies,
Damned Lies, and
Statistics.
A Bust to the Sicilian Defense
Sort:
HolographWars wrote (~18 days ago):
... 74% ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
staples13 wrote:
In my opinion the Sicilian Defense is busted. It loses by force.
I have played 581 games here on chess.com using the Alapin. I have won 68% lost 26% and drawn the other 6%. That is a score of 71%. No other opening is capable of scoring 71%.
Well, personally, I started playing 2 Be2 against the Sicilian a few months back. So far my score in serious games (both OTB and online) against good opposition is P12 W9 D3 L0 for a score of 87.5%. I must therefore conclude that 2 Be2 is stronger than 2 c3 and, moreover, that it wins even more by force. Or not as the case may be 
Magnus Carlsen became a grandmaster in 2004. Since then, according to chessgames.com, he won one, lost two, and drew five games playing as black against Alapin.
May 13, 2019
0
#886
jatait47 wrote:
staples13 wrote:
In my opinion the Sicilian Defense is busted. It loses by force.
I have played 581 games here on chess.com using the Alapin. I have won 68% lost 26% and drawn the other 6%. That is a score of 71%. No other opening is capable of scoring 71%.
Well, personally, I started playing 2 Be2 against the Sicilian a few months back. So far my score in serious games (both OTB and online) against good opposition is P12 W9 D3 L0 for a score of 87.5%. I must therefore conclude that 2 Be2 is stronger than 2 c3 and, moreover, that it wins even more by force. Or not as the case may be
Unfortunately your sample size of 21 is not large enough
kindaspongey wrote (~18 days ago):
... TremaniSunChild (~1 hour ago): "Against what kind of opposition? What strength? What time control? If I played a thousand 1300 to 1500s in regular blitz (Game/5) , I could play the Anderssen or The Vienna or the King's Gambit, and likely score at least 80%!"
uri65 (August 27, 2018): "I am glad you have your personal success with Alapin but statistics of some 1600 player is meaningless for claims you make in first line of your post #1."
June 13, 2019:
https://www.chess.com/blog/JapaneseTutor/the-refutation-to-the-c3-sicilian-smith-morra
As a novice chess player, I can offer very little contribution to the merits of 1. e4 c5 2. c3 ... vs. 1. e4 c5 2. [anything else] ...
However, as a statistics teacher, I can offer a contribution that points out a flaw in the OP’s reasoning.
The OP has conducted a sample; he has played a finite number of fast-paced games, as white, which started as 1. e4 c5 2. c3 .... He is inferring that the results of his sample provide statistical evidence about a population of interest: all chess games that begin with 1. e4 c5 2 c3 ....
One necessary condition for conducting inference about a population is that the sample must be a simple random sample (SRS) from the population of interest. This means that every game in the sample was equally likely to have been included in the sample as any other game in the population. Since the sample only includes this one player’s games that started as 1. e4 c5 2. c3 ..., there is no way this represents a simple random sample from the population of interest (all chess games that start with 1. e4 c5 2. c3 ...). Therefore, the results of this sample CANNOT be used to infer ANYTHING about the population.
Instead, the OP is demonstrating the euphemism, “Garbage In, Garbage Out.” His Sample is “garbage,” in terms of the fact that it does not represent the population of all Alapin games; therefore his conclusion is “garbage,” in that the results of his sample CANNOT be used to infer the results of Alapin games as a whole.
However, as a statistics teacher, I can offer a contribution that points out a flaw in the OP’s reasoning.
The OP has conducted a sample; he has played a finite number of fast-paced games, as white, which started as 1. e4 c5 2. c3 .... He is inferring that the results of his sample provide statistical evidence about a population of interest: all chess games that begin with 1. e4 c5 2 c3 ....
One necessary condition for conducting inference about a population is that the sample must be a simple random sample (SRS) from the population of interest. This means that every game in the sample was equally likely to have been included in the sample as any other game in the population. Since the sample only includes this one player’s games that started as 1. e4 c5 2. c3 ..., there is no way this represents a simple random sample from the population of interest (all chess games that start with 1. e4 c5 2. c3 ...). Therefore, the results of this sample CANNOT be used to infer ANYTHING about the population.
Instead, the OP is demonstrating the euphemism, “Garbage In, Garbage Out.” His Sample is “garbage,” in terms of the fact that it does not represent the population of all Alapin games; therefore his conclusion is “garbage,” in that the results of his sample CANNOT be used to infer the results of Alapin games as a whole.
Jul 26, 2019
0
#889
Alapin usage rates on chess.com have soared 75% since this thread began as it’s becoming harder and harder to justify playing the Sicilian defense as Alapin theory has taken great leaps forward. Congrats to everyone who has contributed
staples13님이 썼습니다:
In my opinion the Sicilian Defense is busted. It loses by force.
The opening move of the Sicilian Defense violates just about every opening principle. It fails to develop a piece, fails to put a pawn in the center, and fails to open up a bishop for development. It allows white to immediately open up the center and to do so with greater development. The Sicilian Defense has nevertheless remained popular despite all of this for one reason and one reason only; in order for white to open up the center it comes at the cost of having to trade its D pawn for black's C pawn. This is why the ideal response to the Sicilian is the Alapin Variation 2. C3! It says to black no you can't have my center pawn. Now white is ahead in both development and control of the center , and black has absolutely no compensation.
You don't believe me? Look at the game explorer then. I have played 581 games here on chess.com using the Alapin. I have won 68% lost 26% and drawn the other 6%. That is a score of 71%. No other opening is capable of scoring 71%. But to prove all this let's look at some games. First, we have a 3 minute no increment blitz game I played. Look at the massive advantage white immediately gets both in piece development and in center control. Both are problems which stem from black's first move.
Here's another 3 minute no increment blitz game I played. Notice how easy white's development is and how black's position is already completely unplayable by move 10.
Finally, I'm sure you want to see a master level game so here we have Deep Blue vs. Kasparov (1996). For a little historical context this was the first match between them and Kasparov annihilated Deep Blue +3 -1=2. Deep Blue's lone victory came as you might guess playing the Alapin Variation. Kasparov faced a horrible position straight out of the opening and Deep Blue wasted no time converting it. Notice that the most powerful chess player of all time got destroyed playing against a computer much weaker than him.
After 2. C3 black is in my opinion lost. White refuses to allow black to exchange its c pawn for white's d pawn giving black no compensation for white's lead in development and center control, which ultimately always proves decisive in the end.
I'd like to close by saying that of course black can always play differently than in the games shown, in which case he merely loses differently.
I have EXCELLENT RESULTS with the SICILIAN!!!!! IT'S THE BEST OPENING EVER! I ALSO HAVE GOOD RESULTS AGAINST THE ALAPIN, MY FRIEND. SEE THE FOLLOWING GAME!
https://www.chess.com/analysis/game/live/3886195706
Jul 26, 2019
0
#891
ChessBoy513 wrote:
staples13님이 썼습니다:
In my opinion the Sicilian Defense is busted. It loses by force.
The opening move of the Sicilian Defense violates just about every opening principle. It fails to develop a piece, fails to put a pawn in the center, and fails to open up a bishop for development. It allows white to immediately open up the center and to do so with greater development. The Sicilian Defense has nevertheless remained popular despite all of this for one reason and one reason only; in order for white to open up the center it comes at the cost of having to trade its D pawn for black's C pawn. This is why the ideal response to the Sicilian is the Alapin Variation 2. C3! It says to black no you can't have my center pawn. Now white is ahead in both development and control of the center , and black has absolutely no compensation.
You don't believe me? Look at the game explorer then. I have played 581 games here on chess.com using the Alapin. I have won 68% lost 26% and drawn the other 6%. That is a score of 71%. No other opening is capable of scoring 71%. But to prove all this let's look at some games. First, we have a 3 minute no increment blitz game I played. Look at the massive advantage white immediately gets both in piece development and in center control. Both are problems which stem from black's first move.
Here's another 3 minute no increment blitz game I played. Notice how easy white's development is and how black's position is already completely unplayable by move 10.
Finally, I'm sure you want to see a master level game so here we have Deep Blue vs. Kasparov (1996). For a little historical context this was the first match between them and Kasparov annihilated Deep Blue +3 -1=2. Deep Blue's lone victory came as you might guess playing the Alapin Variation. Kasparov faced a horrible position straight out of the opening and Deep Blue wasted no time converting it. Notice that the most powerful chess player of all time got destroyed playing against a computer much weaker than him.
After 2. C3 black is in my opinion lost. White refuses to allow black to exchange its c pawn for white's d pawn giving black no compensation for white's lead in development and center control, which ultimately always proves decisive in the end.
I'd like to close by saying that of course black can always play differently than in the games shown, in which case he merely loses differently.
I have EXCELLENT RESULTS with the SICILIAN!!!!! IT'S THE BEST OPENING EVER! I ALSO HAVE GOOD RESULTS AGAINST THE ALAPIN, MY FRIEND. SEE THE FOLLOWING GAME!
Your stats against the Alapin are not good
staples13님이 썼습니다:
ChessBoy513 wrote:
staples13님이 썼습니다:
In my opinion the Sicilian Defense is busted. It loses by force.
The opening move of the Sicilian Defense violates just about every opening principle. It fails to develop a piece, fails to put a pawn in the center, and fails to open up a bishop for development. It allows white to immediately open up the center and to do so with greater development. The Sicilian Defense has nevertheless remained popular despite all of this for one reason and one reason only; in order for white to open up the center it comes at the cost of having to trade its D pawn for black's C pawn. This is why the ideal response to the Sicilian is the Alapin Variation 2. C3! It says to black no you can't have my center pawn. Now white is ahead in both development and control of the center , and black has absolutely no compensation.
You don't believe me? Look at the game explorer then. I have played 581 games here on chess.com using the Alapin. I have won 68% lost 26% and drawn the other 6%. That is a score of 71%. No other opening is capable of scoring 71%. But to prove all this let's look at some games. First, we have a 3 minute no increment blitz game I played. Look at the massive advantage white immediately gets both in piece development and in center control. Both are problems which stem from black's first move.
Here's another 3 minute no increment blitz game I played. Notice how easy white's development is and how black's position is already completely unplayable by move 10.
Finally, I'm sure you want to see a master level game so here we have Deep Blue vs. Kasparov (1996). For a little historical context this was the first match between them and Kasparov annihilated Deep Blue +3 -1=2. Deep Blue's lone victory came as you might guess playing the Alapin Variation. Kasparov faced a horrible position straight out of the opening and Deep Blue wasted no time converting it. Notice that the most powerful chess player of all time got destroyed playing against a computer much weaker than him.
After 2. C3 black is in my opinion lost. White refuses to allow black to exchange its c pawn for white's d pawn giving black no compensation for white's lead in development and center control, which ultimately always proves decisive in the end.
I'd like to close by saying that of course black can always play differently than in the games shown, in which case he merely loses differently.
I have EXCELLENT RESULTS with the SICILIAN!!!!! IT'S THE BEST OPENING EVER! I ALSO HAVE GOOD RESULTS AGAINST THE ALAPIN, MY FRIEND. SEE THE FOLLOWING GAME!
Your stats against the Alapin are not good
I won the game though.
rychessmaster1님이 썼습니다:
My refutation: 1. e4 c5 2. c3 Qa5!! this prevents 3. d4 and black is winning
Finally someone understands it.
Jul 26, 2019
0
#894
I bet OP also refuted the French, Caro Kann, Grunfeld, Slav, QGD, Grunfeld, Nmzo, Benko gambit, and Benoni
I am going to use the Alapin in my next otb game. Should be decent quality with both of us being A players.
ChessBoy513 wrote:
rychessmaster1님이 썼습니다:
My refutation: 1. e4 c5 2. c3 Qa5!! this prevents 3. d4 and black is winning
Finally someone understands it.
But then black’s most powerful piece is sidelined AND black still has no center pawn, while White can develop easily.
IM pfren wrote (September 4, 2018):
Both 2...Nf6 and 2...d5 are fine against the Alapin, and some players may also like 2...e6 or 2...g6.
Jul 27, 2019
0
#898
GM_Kenny_Ji wrote:
I bet OP also refuted the French, Caro Kann, Grunfeld, Slav, QGD, Grunfeld, Nmzo, Benko gambit, and Benoni
Let’s try not to be ridiculous please
Jul 27, 2019
0
#899
HolographWars wrote:
I am going to use the Alapin in my next otb game. Should be decent quality with both of us being A players.
Good luck fine sir, But you won’t need luck
@Mrmerbs57 say that to Howell, Tiviakov, Sveshnikov, Adams, Rozentalis, Vajda, Pavasovic, Sermek, Stevic and dozens of other strong grandmasters who have played it with greats results, even against the strongest GMs.