MikeZeggelaar "Clearly the gambit has been shown to be sound" Really??
I played the Smith Morra for years at very high levels but gave up the White side of that gambit even though my results vs experts and masters were very good.
Ken Smith was a friend and published many of my games. RIP Ken Smith
The Smith-Morra is not unsound but the important thing is that it is not any good either. If Black doesn’t fall for a trap White will be the one working to hold the draw.
Why revive a 4 year old thread on the unsound Smith-Moron Gambit?
Clearly the gambit has been shown to be sound.
With best play, you get a normal Sicilian position, but with White down a pawn. At that point, I'd just try to learn the theory.
I just picked it up recently after getting the book Mayhem in the Morra by IM Marc Esserman and I believe it to be completely sound. In fact at my level and below, I think it is probably an excellent weapon because many lines often force black to play complete defense (in exchange for his pawn), and I find that for a tactical player white can get in some great spots. I played the King's gambit for a long time and find the Morra much better as you rarely have to worry about king safety.
I think it is a particularly good weapon if you are going to play players rated well above you because it introduces a lot of "variance" into the game, which you want as the lower rated player.
@OP... No, it's not great. Against strong players you pretty much giving a free pawn. Against weaker player, or blitz, you might have success. Alapin or Canal are better.
3..e5 is the most recent development that seems to kill white's chances of attacking or gaining any initiative. leads to an improved version of either the scotch four knights or the ng5 italian, or some unique lines with qc7 which are worse for white than the two openings i mentioned above. this is what would put me off from playing the morra. i don't mind the alapin tranpositions. the systems where black accepts and goes for e6 a6 nge7 and h6 are also a pain for white but i think 3..e5 is simpler.
Old thread, but for posterity's sake, I've used it in correspondence to beat players who are 1900+ in blitz, both with gambit accepted and declined. I love open positions and don't generally feel the lost pawn because the lead in development is often overwhelming for black. Also, I personally don't study theory, and I like that this is easy to learn and you don't need a ton of theory to use it effectively.
I play the sicilian as black... the smith morra is terrible on multiple levels, that's the honest truth of it. It's probably the opening I'm most happy to see white play of all the many sidelines. When you win it's really just because black hasn't bothered yet to think about how to deal with it, which he should since it doesn't take that long.
- It's not surprising, it's the thing that everyone calls surprising. Much like when your mom says to you "surprise!" and then hands you a pair of clean socks. Alot of players play it thinking they'll be surprising. At club level it's probably more common to face the smith morra than to face the correct main line of whatever open sicilian you play.
- the player earlier who explained the sicilian is a defensive setup and is capable of withstanding 1 tempo loss was onto something but I don't think he really pinpointed the issue. Due to the material advantage, black is not under the same pressure to play actively as he is in a typical sicilian, and can be content to just trade off the pieces. Even if black never pushes his d pawn, white manages to blockade it and claim it, the material will be equal. White actually needs to break blacks position to justify his opening, that's really the problem. But that isn't so easy, because
a) white isn't castling queenside since he has no c pawn to protect his king, and if he did castle queenside after Rc8 he'd need to invest a tempo in Kb2. Castling kingside almost always results in an easy game for black in the sicilian.
b) white doesn't have a forward f pawn because he didn't play Nxd4.
- It only bypasses theory because there's no complexity to it and not much actual theory needed to deal with it. White almost always plays the same moves, you almost always respond in the same way, and then you almost always win.
- Look up the main lines in a database (where black knows how to react) and examine the winrates - you will find 65%+ winrates for black. This is the line I play against it, if we reach this point black has an 80% winrate... you can see here that black actually gets alot of tempos back in free development as he harasses the queenside without even worrying about pushing his d pawn. And here an e5 pawn push is irrelevant since Bb7 protects the knight when it comes to d5. This position is reached via whites most common moves, 90% of smith morra players play the same moves so this is usually where it ends up -
The smith-morra gambit isnt very good in my opinion. The Alapin Sicilian opening is superior in my experience. The only advantage the smith-morra gambit has over the Alapin is that it stops Black from playing an awkward 2. e5
It is playable
If black declines the gambit with either 3...d5 or 3...Nf6, then it transposes to the Alapin variation, so white can better play the Alapin variation 2 c3 right away.
What's really funny about the Smith Morra is it doesn't actually give white a tempo. We often hear how white is up a tempo... but people generally haven't thought critically about this. Because instead of playing Nxd4 white played Nxc3 - white developed a knight either way. The extra tempo is in the form of the move c3, sacrificing that pawn and opening up the c file.
A move like that accelerates development if it's an e pawn or d pawn where you're opening a bishop up, or if you're potentially opening up a useful file for your rook. White generally does not touch the c3 pawn in the sicilian, and if he does it's to bolster d4, not to liqiduite it. White gains absolutely nothing from liquidating the c3 pawn in the sicilian. This does not accelerate development when the pawn isn't blocking anything or you don't need the file open. Infact... it only increases blacks initiative - if you look at one of the games posted it's black who attacks on the queenside with his rook on c8... Black uses the open c file throughout the entire midgame to pressure the knight on c3, making b3 difficult to play, maintaining control over the c4 square for the black knight... In the sicilian white wants to castle queenside, and keep those pawns intact to defend the king...
Another point of debate is whether the knight is useful on d4 or is more comfortable back on f3. If it's better on f3 then one could argue you've saved a tempo in keeping it there. But again the answer is pretty clear if you know anything about the sicilian - white always wants to castle queenside and push f3 or f4, he can't do that with a knight on f3. Furthermore the knight on d4 can often force concessions like a6 or trade on c6, sometimes Nbd5 can pressure d6, or force white to play e5 which leaves him with a backward d pawn.
It's honestly just a terrible opening.
@34
"it doesn't actually give white a tempo"
++ It gains 2 tempi for the pawn.
White has made 3 developing moves: 1 e4, 2 d4, 4 Nxc3,
and black none: neither 1...c5, nor 2...cxd4, nor 3...dxc3 is a developing move.
If you accept 1...c5 as a developing move as it opens the diagonal for Qd8 to a5,
then 3 c3 is also a developing move as it opens the diagonal of Qd1 to a4.
"White generally does not touch the c3 pawn in the sicilian"
++ In the Alapin or in the Maroczy white plays c3 resp. c4.
In the Sveshnikov white plays c3 to re-route Nd4-b5-a3-c2-e3, or he plays c4 after Nd5.
"White gains absolutely nothing from liquidating the c3 pawn in the sicilian."
++ White gains 2 tempi for the pawn. As white is up +1 tempo, that is fair: 3 tempi = 1 pawn.
"This does not accelerate development when the pawn isn't blocking anything"
++ c3 opens the diagonal to a4 for Qd1.
"In the sicilian white wants to castle queenside"
++ Not always, there are many variations where white castles kingside.
"whether the knight is useful on d4" ++ A knight in the center is strong.
"white always wants to castle queenside"
++ No. In the Caruana-Carlsen World Championship Match there were 7 Sicilians and Caruana castled O-O in 5 games, O-O-O in 1 and 1 without castling.
"It's honestly just a terrible opening." ++ It is playable, but the Alapin 2 c3 right away is more pragmatic, as black can transpose into it if he declines the Gambit with either 3...d5 or 3...Nf6.
@34
"it doesn't actually give white a tempo"
++ It gains 2 tempi for the pawn.
White has made 3 developing moves: 1 e4, 2 d4, 4 Nxc3,
and black none: neither 1...c5, nor 2...cxd4, nor 3...dxc3 is a developing move.
When we say white is "up a tempo" in the Smith Morra we're comparing it with the open sicilian, not speaking in some irrelevant abstract sense. White has gained one tempo with which he played c3 which is a wasted tempo, and nothing more noteworthy. c3 doesn't open up any line that white will use, it only opens up lines for black. If you gain a tempo and play a useless move which wastes it you are not up a tempo, tempo is not merely a count of non-redundant moves played it is a concept of initiative, you can lose it by playing bad moves. For example, a move such as 1. a3 is not considered worth a full tempo until white can make use of a3, and if he can't make use of it white is considered to have lost a tempo.
Keep trying
If you accept 1...c5 as a developing move as it opens the diagonal for Qd8 to a5,
then 3 c3 is also a developing move as it opens the diagonal of Qd1 to a4.
No, because c5 does something to control the center whereas liquidating c3 does absolutely nothing for white in these positions. as I have just explained but which has passed through your one ear and out the other... black wants to play a6 > b5 in the sicilian. Black attacks on the queenside. Black is going to play a6 > b5 if unimpeded, bumping the bishop, otherwise a6 and white will respond with a4 (using a tempo). i.e. the queen will never use that diagonal in these lines. What will happen is black will play Rc8 after expanding on the queenside, typical developing moves in the sicilian, the white queen will not even use the c2 square.
"White generally does not touch the c3 pawn in the sicilian"
++ In the Alapin or in the Maroczy white plays c3 resp. c4.
In the Sveshnikov white plays c3 to re-route Nd4-b5-a3-c2-e3, or he plays c4 after Nd5.
You deleted the qualification which followed "except to bolster the center which we aren't doing", then you responded to half the statement as if it didn't already fully acknowledge your point. But then you fail to mention a) we aren't bolstering the center here, b) we aren't rerouting the knight here, c) we aren't setting up a maroczy bind here. d) in none of these cases are we liquidating the c pawn to open up the c file since this would only help black.
"White gains absolutely nothing from liquidating the c3 pawn in the sicilian."
++ White gains 2 tempi for the pawn. As white is up +1 tempo, that is fair: 3 tempi = 1 pawn.
When we say white has gained a tempo by playing the Smith Morra we are comparing it with the open sicilian. It is not useful to get lost in some abstract theoretical babble here, you can only confuse yourself into believing the Smith Morra is a good opening. The 1 tempo white has gained by playing c3 dxc3 Nxc3 over Nxd4 is he has moved c3. That is his one tempo gained over the open sicilian. When you waste a move, you are down a tempo. c3 is a wasted move. This was just explained in the previous post, you deleted that part of it and responded to this in isolation, I don't know why you do this. c3 is a wasted move, therefor white is not up a tempo, period not complicated, not even worth debating, should not even be worth commenting on.
"This does not accelerate development when the pawn isn't blocking anything"
++ c3 opens the diagonal to a4 for Qd1.
Again the diagonal is not ever used by the queen because in the proceeding lines black plays a6 > b5 tempoing the bishop, or a6 then a4 is played by white. For example, if you sac a pawn to open up a rook then never put the rook on the file or use the file... that pawn sac is a waste of tempo. In turn, if your opponent uses the open file instead you've actually lost tempo by making the move, not gained it. This is just the basic concept of tempo, maybe go back and study chess 101 then come back and update your comment.
"In the sicilian white wants to castle queenside"
++ Not always, there are many variations where white castles kingside.
They're not the attacking lines. In the Sveshnikov white castled kingside because black has already expanded on the queenside, that's a concession, it's not because he wants to do it. This isn't whites ideal - in all the ideal attacking lines like the Yugoslav, the English attack, the richter-rauzer - white is castling queenside. There are times when this isn't possible - the Smith Morra is one such example - but it's a concession. On the other hand, there are subtler variations in the classical / dragon as well where white can castle kingside, but these are generally not challenging. Here in the Smith Morra black intends to "attack as fast as possible", that's the idea... a subtle kingside castle does not contribute to it. But white really has no choice because he threw away the c3 pawn for no initiative whatsoever.
"whether the knight is useful on d4" ++ A knight in the center is strong.
Which was the entire point of the post you're responding to. Again why you are telling me this when I just said it myself is a mystery to me
"white always wants to castle queenside"
++ No. In the Caruana-Carlsen World Championship Match there were 7 Sicilians and Caruana castled O-O in 5 games, O-O-O in 1 and 1 without castling.
"It's honestly just a terrible opening." ++ It is playable, but the Alapin 2 c3 right away is more pragmatic, as black can transpose into it if he declines the Gambit with either 3...d5 or 3...Nf6.
Those are Sveshnikov games. When the knight is booted in that line it comes to b5 and then pawn moves often proceed, so queenside castling isn't viable, again this is a concession, it's not an ideal. When we say white "wants" to do something we're thinking of ideals, not concessions.
Tons of openings that are bad are playable, that isn't saying much.
I use to lose vs. Smith-Morra Gambit as well with Black pieces.
I went to search for a line which could crush the Smith-Morra.
The line I was given is a line a lot different vs. the lines you peeps showed above.
It is very interesting.
The line was considered to be a computer refutation well it was supposed to be 1 of the lines computers found to really give Smith-Morra problems.
I don’t know if it’s still considered the go to line, but it is interesting.
The line looks like below:
Everything Black is doing looks normal.
It looks like Black is doing a Schevengian or something.
Than move 9 comes and Black has only 1 Star move - All other moves lose on spot.
White is threatening e5 and if they get e5 it is pretty much game over for Black.
So Black has to play a key computer like defense.
Extraordinary isn’t it?
Black stops White completely with that move - White can’t play e5 now!
Basically, you have to remember to play that move as Black.
Why revive a 4 year old thread on the unsound Smith-Moron Gambit?
Clearly the gambit has been shown to be sound.