A Bust to the Sicilian Defense

staples13

This is my most recent 1 minute bullet game. Black resigned after just 9 moves after getti into a hopeless position with his Sicilian 

PolarPhoenix
staples13 wrote:

This is my most recent 1 minute bullet game. Black resigned after just 9 moves after getti into a hopeless position with his Sicilian 

Ur in a hopeless position in this argument.

staples13

Seriously people it’s not that hard to just stop playing the Sicilian. 

kindaspongey
staples13 wrote:

... 1 e4 c5 2 c3 Nc6 ... This is my most recent 1 minute bullet game. Black resigned after just 9 moves after getti into a hopeless position with his Sicilian 

"... d5 and nf6 do provide much stiffer resistance than any of black's other responses. I, however, believe black is still lost even after these moves. I will post an analysis shortly." - staples13 (August 27, 2018)

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/a-bust-to-the-sicilian-defense?page=2

"staples13 ... U showed your own analysis, with some nonsense and bad moves from black which don't prove anything. U just proved u lack some objectivity and skill to assess moves/positions." - IM pouncin (September 26, 2018)
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/a-bust-to-the-sicilian-defense?page=12

GMRVSYash
staples13 wrote:

Black resigned after just 9 moves after getting into a hopeless position with his Sicilian. Hopeless you say? Does a Stockfish evaluation of 0.00 (depth=43) constitute as "hopeless" for black?

 

HolographWars
GMRVSYash wrote:
staples13 wrote:

Black resigned after just 9 moves after getting into a hopeless position with his Sicilian. Hopeless you say? Does a Stockfish evaluation of 0.00 (depth=43) constitute as "hopeless" for black?

 

As for me, I am not arguing that the Alapin gives black a hopeless game, but I do claim that it is an extremely powerful weapon for human v. human. Staples13 has a high win rate when he plays against another human.

PolarPhoenix
HolographWars wrote:
GMRVSYash wrote:
staples13 wrote:

Black resigned after just 9 moves after getting into a hopeless position with his Sicilian. Hopeless you say? Does a Stockfish evaluation of 0.00 (depth=43) constitute as "hopeless" for black?

 

As for me, I am not arguing that the Alapin gives black a hopeless game, but I do claim that it is an extremely powerful weapon for human v. human. Staples13 has a high win rate when he plays against another human.

... He also has an extremely high win rate with the sicilian. 

Mrmerbs57

PolarPhoenix wrote:

HolographWars wrote:
GMRVSYash wrote:
staples13 wrote:

Black resigned after just 9 moves after getting into a hopeless position with his Sicilian. Hopeless you say? Does a Stockfish evaluation of 0.00 (depth=43) constitute as "hopeless" for black?

 

As for me, I am not arguing that the Alapin gives black a hopeless game, but I do claim that it is an extremely powerful weapon for human v. human. Staples13 has a high win rate when he plays against another human.

... He also has an extremely high win rate with the sicilian. 

I do find this topic quite amusing, especially the Title ... A Bust for the Sicilian, the Alpin 2.c3 is not a Bust weapon against the Sicillian, I have Personally played 18 games against the Alpin Over the Board against 1800 rated players and have always played 2...d5! winning 10, and drawing 6, Losing 2. of course I am no master just a decent county player. The internet is a marvellous tool so I looked up the use of the Alpin by G.M's over the last 5 years and the Alpin scores just 43% that's under 50% so maybe this is why the elite G.M's choose still to use the open Sicilian lines, as Fischer and others since have done. The Alpin is ok at the level of 1600 - 2000 but doubt it will ever be main weapon against the Sicilian sadly only a surprise opening against the less prepared!?

doyouacceptdraw

@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.

Mrmerbs57

doyouacceptdraw wrote:

@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.

uuumm well still only scores 43% of top games played over last 5 years so cannot agree 2.C3 is as good as any of the open lines, besides which not even Carlsen as scored so successful!??

HolographWars

Wait hold on...

There are 3 types of lies. 

Lies,

Damned Lies, and

Statistics.

kindaspongey
HolographWars wrote (~18 days ago):

... 74% ...

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

jatait47
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 wink.png

Mrmerbs57

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 wink.png

very impressive but I wonder at what level the majority of these Alpin 2.C3 wins we're against, I suspect quite a few quick play control times, the only acid test is long play for any opening, I only play long play myself, Sicilian is busted hey, say that to Kasparov, and even Carlsen, even Fischer would open his coffin and pull out his pocket set on that one!!?

doyouacceptdraw

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.

staples13
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
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

JimUrban2718
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.