A Passive Sicilian?

I'm not going to buy the book you said, not because I don't want to know why (I do), but spending money on my 11th opening book when I have 13 just doesn't suit me. In my experience (from white) I've found the Scheveningen structure a tough nut to crack; in a recent daily game, I played the Keres Attack against my 2000-rated opponent and lost. For me, attacking the Scheveningen feels like throwing myself into a wall face-first repeatedly, which didn't do anything for my suspicion that it was a passive structure compared to other sicilians. 

I agree with you here (depends on preferences), and I also might be pushing it a bit, but what I wanted to know was (to the people who played this before) is what they feel the opening is like. 

Is it counterpunching? Solid? stuff like that.

Having less space and being passive aren't the same thing.  Passive implies that all you are doing is blocking the punches and figuring as long as you survive all 10 rounds in the ring, great, mission accomplished!

That is not at all what Black does in the Scheveningen.  Sure, there are threats by White that must be answered.  But Black is not playing a passive game at all.  He is typically building a Queenside attack, expanding with b5 and attacking down the c-file.  In lines where White castles Queenside, like the English attack, it is usually a bloodbath.  In the Classical Scheveningen, where White castles short, Black's attack is still on the Queenside, though it tends to me more methodical, and he is also usually looking for that opportunity to counter strike in the center with either ...e5 (often preceded by a Knight trade on d4) or ...d5.

Passive would be more like the Philidor or Old Indian.

Ok, I've already understood that, but what do you think the Scheveningen style is? Like chess personality tests-but for openings.

I do not categorize openings.  This whole X is positional, Y is tactical, Z is aggressive is total BS.

I have over 2900 slow time control tournament games over the board.  I had a really wild Exchange French yesterday that ended in a wild draw by perpetual check that I had to take despite being up material (if I can find it after posting this, I'll put the link in another post on this thread).

I have had dull Najdorfs, wild Slavs, dull Kings Gambits, wild Petroffs.

There is no one size fits all to describe any opening.

Believe it or not, there is a reason I am a huge advocate of the French (despite having occasionally played other defenses to e4 for variety) and still am scrambling for the ideal defense to d4 and what to play as White.  It is similar to being a baby and allowing the baby to become left or right handed on their own.

I first learned how to play in 1983 at the age of 8.  Played occasionally at the same frequency that you'd play Monopoly.  In the fall of 1995, My junior year of college at age 20, I studied my first book, "Winning Chess Tactics" followed by "Winning Chess Strategies" and "How To Win in the Chess Endings".  During that time, I was winging it in the opening.  Experimented with various moves.  The main person that would stay up all night in the lobby of the dorm always played 1.e4.  I fiddled with different pawn ideas.  e5, d6 and e5, c6 and f5, c5, e6 and d5, Nc6 I seem to recall, etc.  I became very comfortable with e6 and d5 and asked if it had a name.  I find out it is called the French Defense, and my 4th chess book, and first opening book, was Winning With the French by Wolfgang Uhlmann.

In my 2900 or so games, roughly 1450 to 1470 of them as Black, I probably have about 500 to 600 games on the Black side of the French.  In those 500 to 600 games, I have had everything from Ultra Dull to Head spinning, Hair raising wild goose chases.

So again, you can not categorize an opening.  Even the scheveningen.  You will have wild hair raising games and you will have those where watching paint dry may be more interesting.

Here is the game I was referring to in post 25.  It is blitz, so throw quality out the window, but if you try to categorize the opening, people describe the exchange French as dull.  This game was not dull.  Not saying it was played well, just saying it was not dull.

https://www.chess.com/live/game/4997527095

So what I was asking was, what does if FEEL like when you play this structure? Counterpunching? Aggressive? etc.>>

Depends on how I feel in myself and how focussed I am and how well my mind is working. It can be anything from horrible to something that gives rise to a sense of determination. Freeing such a position is very difficult because all of white's possibilities have to be assessed at all stages. That's where wins can come from though. There can come a point when white, or the opponent, whichever colour, continues to push, thinking s/he is still better, more active, better potential, winning.

If it's been a hard game for me and I would take a draw, that's when I would offer a draw ..... about two moves before my position frees itself and especially when there's something that you want white to do which is aggressive and wrong. The number of games I've won by offering a draw at that exact, psychological moment. I'm convinced that, if you get it right, white turns down the draw and immediately tries to justify his decision with overly aggressive play.

When you are ready to move a level up, you'll be ready to learn the art of regrouping. Chess isn't necessary a wham bang thankyou ma'am experience. Sometimes you try to build something up and you realise that a different approach is needed, and you try to work our what pieces you need for that approach and what exchanges you can make to give you the best chance, if any, and you reshuffle. Sometimes the reshuffling can be a form of entrapment. Occasionally it rebounds and you under-estimate an attack. There might be enough potential in a position to have three separate goes at winning by different means each time.

Cheap skate!  I have 300 to 400 books, probably all but 100 of them are on Openings.

Actually, in the last three weeks or so, I have bought 5 books, 4 of them on openings!

Soon you will learn that being cheap does not work when it comes to openings.  Especially the Sicilian, where theory changes drastically!  I have more than double the number of French books than you have total opening books!

Interesting, but I’m too casual and too young to be running around with enough money to have over 400 books-

Thats a lot of books. A lot of studying. 

400 girlfriends would also be too many. You should compromise. Three girlfriends but always keep them apart and unaware of one-another, and I'd say about 30 chess books as a maximum and always keep them separate. Don't read them together but absorb what each person teaches. Then as you get the hang of them, you can compare them. Some GMs have great ideas but are bad teachers. In fact, maybe that's nearly all GMs.

How did this get to girlfriends again? I am barely a competent driver.

You can drive already? Oh sorry, just saying, if you have too many chess books and they're all screaming "me me me!", the messages can get crossed up.

I did not buy them all at once.  They span from 1995 to 2020, but you don't stop at 11 and succeed.

I have only one book which I have shunned... it was too deep for me. (Koltanowski-Phoenix attack, future of the c3 colle). Problem was, I don’t play the Colle nearly enough to get into ideal positions for it... so I don’t bother with that book, haha. Recently I’ve been looking back into “Attack with Mikhail tal”, but it’s pretty painful to set up positions only to finish it in a few seconds. And the variations are too deep to envision, so setting up a board is forced.

The best thing to do is always to ignore everyone's advice and do your own thing, because after all, it's a game. That's my advice, of course.

When I was 15 I couldn't believe that people stayed indoors and played chess. I er...   well, that is, I did things like getting on my bike and looking for unofficial fly tips where people had thrown stuff away and you always got televisions and old radios, and I took them home and salvaged the parts out of them and build electronic gadgets that sometimes worked. I once did a flashing light which flashed once only and then gradually went off and never blinked again because the diode I'd used blew, because it was out of a tip. Learned a lot though, by soldering a finger instead of a resistor.

I would call that the Sitting Duck Variation. I play it against 1. e4 ... c5 2. d4 ...cd 3. c3 ...dc because black is a pawn up. In normal lines I play it with my B on c5 and the QN on d7, which is fine. What you call the Turtle is just sitting there in a small hole in the sand and hoping the opposition isn't carnivorous. It's all very well ending up in that position, too, if you're previously used your c8B to soften up the opposition and provoke a few weaknesses or piece misplacements. But as a straightforward developmental idea, it stinks, against a white who is already building his attack. It's hope chess ^n.

interesting take.