Well if we go by the Grand Swiss games, which are actually being played between top level players, the real bust to the Sicilian is the Moscow variation.
The Moscow variation is a solid opening that gives white a moderate advantage, but is inaccurate because it gives black drawing chances.
On the contrary. If your opponent has more time to think, then he/she may play a better move. Or bring you into a difficult situation too.
Moreover,if you claim that time control doesn't matter, why then do you keep insisting on playing 3 minutes games? If your claim is true, then you can beat anyone with the Alapin,no matter the time control. Right? Why don't you prove it by playing let's say 30 min game or even 90 min + 30 sec increment, which is the official time globally?
Because I don’t like long time controls. My opponent might play the London System, and then I’ll have wasted an hour of my life on the most boring game of chess ever played
... the time control a game is played at doesn’t affect whether or not a position is winning. ...
Does it affect whether or not the moves are very close to "best play"?
Let us know if you ever decide that you want to answer the question. In the meantime, we can consider:
"... the kind of thinking it takes to plan, evaluate, play long endgames, and find deep combinations is just not possible in quick chess. ..." - NM Dan Heisman (2002)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627052239/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman16.pdf
On the contrary. If your opponent has more time to think, then he/she may play a better move. Or bring you into a difficult situation too.
Moreover,if you claim that time control doesn't matter, why then do you keep insisting on playing 3 minutes games? If your claim is true, then you can beat anyone with the Alapin,no matter the time control. Right? Why don't you prove it by playing let's say 30 min game or even 90 min + 30 sec increment, which is the official time globally?
Because I don’t like long time controls. My opponent might play the London System, and then I’ll have wasted an hour of my life on the most boring game of chess ever played
The way I see it, you are avoiding to prove your theory on longer time limits... That's all.
On the contrary. If your opponent has more time to think, then he/she may play a better move. Or bring you into a difficult situation too.
Moreover,if you claim that time control doesn't matter, why then do you keep insisting on playing 3 minutes games? If your claim is true, then you can beat anyone with the Alapin,no matter the time control. Right? Why don't you prove it by playing let's say 30 min game or even 90 min + 30 sec increment, which is the official time globally?
Because I don’t like long time controls. My opponent might play the London System, and then I’ll have wasted an hour of my life on the most boring game of chess ever played
The way I see it, you are avoiding to prove your theory on longer time limits... That's all.
Hating long time controls is fine. Plus, the London does suck. Stop berating him for not wanting to playing long games online
Then he needs to stop saying that he can bust anyone with any time limit. You can scroll the pages and see for yourself that he did make that claim, only to take it vack when smn said that he could face him in many 15 min +10 sec increment games. Besides, that format is not THAT long.
... 1. e4 c5 2. c3 Nf6 3. e5 Nd5 4. d4 cxd4 5. Nf3 dxc3 6. Qxd5 ... 1-0 No one is even surviving 10 moves against the Alapin.
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/a-bust-to-the-sicilian-defense?page=82
A theoretically important game?
I am waiting for a game with an IM/GM as well.
Also your comment is untrue. Fake news. No IM/GM has accepted my offer to play at any time control. Furthermore I did not say I would beat any IM/GM with the Alapin at any time control, instead I just said that I would play them.
I suspect that this entire thread is designed to discredit the Alapin Sicilian. People read what staples13 has to say and think "If idiots like this play the Alapin, it must be pure garbage!"
I am waiting for a game with an IM/GM as well.
Also your comment is untrue. Fake news. No IM/GM has accepted my offer to play at any time control. Furthermore I did not say I would beat any IM/GM with the Alapin at any time control, instead I just said that I would play them.
Wjy don't you do it then? Play with different time controls. You can challenge IMs and GMs yourself too you know. So instead of writing,why don't you prove everyone wrong?
Or better yet, enter an OTB tournament and bust some Sicilians in real life instead in your fantasy life
The Lucena Position is not a mate in 2. It’s like a mate in 20
You seem to be far too literal in your thinking. It's an analogy, not a direct comparison of equal ratios.
I have played and conversed with a few CMs (and NMs, but not applicable here) over time, and I find there is a spectrum that splits into two kinds of players at 2000-ish rating:
- The ones that are still striving to learn and get better
- The ones that have stopped learning, think they know secrets that higher titled players cannot fathom, make various absolute claims about openings or other narrow pronouncements, and/or who bitterly complain about the various "factors" that hold them back
This is a phenom that exists almost exclusively in the 2000-2100 range. It's like some players hit 2000 and decide they are now a legit part of the titled 2000-2800 crowd and that the only difference between them and super GM status is largely circumstance. That disappears around 2100, because reaching 2200 kind of requires players that are mature enough realize they have to buckle down to progress, and how very far they need to climb still.
Meanwhile, though, making any absolute claims about chess is not really within grasp. And that's the point here...and I'm not saying you are definitely the latter, but you sure aren't the former 
. Though admittedly, I have not dealt with any players that are 2000+ in blitz only.
Edit: @Optimissed sending PMs while blocking replies is pretty cowardly, or at the very least, negligent and forgetful . I'm sure I don't need any help talking to Staples, but if it makes you feel better, I'm aware of your point, and have indirectly and intentionally drawn attention to it. Someone that doesn't take things too literally might have surmised that. Also, saying "are you still talking to XYZ?" in the context of a 90+ page thread that I just commented on for the first time yesterday doesn't make any sense.
Once a player rated 1600-1700 (or anyone below 2700, quite frankly), makes a claim like "1.e4 c5 2.c3 wins by force", it's clear it's either a joke or a troll thread. Any real chess discussion is no longer relevant. So, let's continue in the same vein as the OP instead...
Indeed, the Alapin is a mighty weapon that busts most replies. Just look at the position after 2...Nf6? 3.e5! Nd5. White is clearly ahead in development. You know, by not having developed any pieces. But ahead, regardless. Or after 2...e6? 3.d4! d5 4.exd5 exd5, note how White controls the center. Don't look at the Black pawn on d5! White controls the center, I tell you!
But, there is one amazing reply that refutes the Alapin - 2...f5!! By gambiting the pawn, Black gains control of the center and superior development. Just look at the position after 3. exf5 d5! (not 3...Nf6?! 4.d4) 4.Qh5+ Kd7. Black will follow up with ...Nf6, ...Nc6, ...Kc7, and either winning back the f5 pawn or even turning this into a real gambit by exchanging the e7 pawn for the f5 pawn. Black will control the center and use his faster development to launch an attack on the White king.
The only way to prevent this destructive counter-attack is by 1.e4 c5 2.g4!! And next While will play 3.c3 with a clear advantage..
I will expand my challenge to any IM as well. I will represent the Alapin and my opponent will play the Sicilian. Here are the rules. We play one 3 minute no increment blitz game winner take all. I get the white pieces and must play 1. e4 followed by 2. c3. You must play 1. c5. May the better opening win. Thank you all for you attention to this important matter
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/a-bust-to-the-sicilian-defense?page=89
I am waiting for a game with an IM/GM as well.
Also your comment is untrue. Fake news. No IM/GM has accepted my offer to play at any time control. Furthermore I did not say I would beat any IM/GM with the Alapin at any time control, instead I just said that I would play them.
Anyway, this thread has lost its meaning...
i have always responded to the Alapin with [1. e4 c5 2. c3 d6 3. d4 Nf6 4. dxc5 Nc6] with wonderful results.
"... Objectively stronger [than 4.dxc5] is 4.Bd3 [with a slight advantage for White] or [the interesting move] 4.f3 [with a slight advantage for White}." - GM Evgeny Sveshnikov (2010)
"Of course, [2...d6] is not the strongest move, since it allows White to seize the centre." - GM Evgeny Sveshnikov (2010)
"Both 2...Nf6 and 2...d5 are fine against the Alapin, and some players may also like 2...e6 or 2...g6." - IM pfren (September 4, 2018)
yes, i have had no problems with Bd3 also 
How do you react to 1 e4 c5 2 c3 d6 3 d4 Nf6 4 Bd3 ?
How do you disconnect from a thread? This nonsense is getting tedious and is clogging my email up with pointless notifications.
The Lucena Position is not a mate in 2. It’s like a mate in 20