French vs. The Sicilian
Sort:
French is easier to learn there aren't millions of variations like the silicon
priyadarsi_mishra123 wrote:
... the silicon
Don't they like it in the valley?
May 15, 2019
0
#64
pfren wrote:
You certainly have more to study if you pick any of the major Sicilians.
You can also use the same variation (Rubinstein) against 3.Nc3 and 3.Nd2. Grandmaster Georg Meier plays it almost exclusively with great results (mainly because of his excellent positional technique, and less because of the opening, mind you).
@pfren sorry for bumping this thread, but if you recommended the Rubinstein then how would you say black should play for a win against 7.c3 ? It seems that this line leads to an unpleasant endgame for black where white plays for 2 results
May 16, 2019
0
#65
pfren wrote:
my137thaccount έγραψε:
pfren wrote:
You certainly have more to study if you pick any of the major Sicilians.
You can also use the same variation (Rubinstein) against 3.Nc3 and 3.Nd2. Grandmaster Georg Meier plays it almost exclusively with great results (mainly because of his excellent positional technique, and less because of the opening, mind you).
@pfren sorry for bumping this thread, but if you recommended the Rubinstein then how would you say black should play for a win against 7.c3 ? It seems that this line leads to an unpleasant endgame for black where white plays for 2 results
What is so unpleasant in this fairly typical 3:2 majority endgame?
If this was automatically better for white, then a lot of openings (Sicilian included) would be unplayable.
It's just a matter of knowing how to handle this type of endgame as Black, and this has nothing to do with the opening itself.
What are blacks plans in this type of endgame? I haven't found any GM games in this specific line where black won, so I'm not sure what to use as model games, do you have any good examples of the correct black strategy in action?
One advantage of the French is that the pawn structures tend to be similar between variations.
May 16, 2019
0
#67
SchaakVoorAlles wrote:
The lazy reason for learning the Rubinstein French is to get by with a minimum of preparation. A better reason is to have a good surprise weapon for when you are happy with a draw. But to get that it is not enough to know the opening well. You have to be an excellent endgame player as well. The drawbacks are huge. It makes you easy to prepare against, the Rubinstein gives you few winning chances if White is not trying to win, your chess education remains narrow ... and then there is the difficult variation with c3, simply supporting d4 and opening a route to a4 for the Queen, as popularised by Kasparov.
In chess, laziness is not the route to success.
French or Sicilian? They give the game a different character, so may suit different temperaments. In either case you have to know how to play chess, as well as learning the theory (and WHY it is theory). I think most top players could handle either opening well, and on either side ... at least they could do that in their encounters with lesser players. Of course against other super-GMs they play what they think gives them the best chance of the result they are after.
I'm not using it as an excuse for laziness, the Rubinstein has a lot of theory since there are many attempts by white to gain an advantage. I just like the simplified positions that result and want to get better in the endgame
SchaakVoorAlles wrote:
The lazy reason for learning the Rubinstein French is to get by with a minimum of preparation. A better reason is to have a good surprise weapon for when you are happy with a draw. But to get that it is not enough to know the opening well. You have to be an excellent endgame player as well. The drawbacks are huge. It makes you easy to prepare against, the Rubinstein gives you few winning chances if White is not trying to win, your chess education remains narrow ... and then there is the difficult variation with c3, simply supporting d4 and opening a route to a4 for the Queen, as popularised by Kasparov.
In chess, laziness is not the route to success.
French or Sicilian? They give the game a different character, so may suit different temperaments. In either case you have to know how to play chess, as well as learning the theory (and WHY it is theory). I think most top players could handle either opening well, and on either side ... at least they could do that in their encounters with lesser players. Of course against other super-GMs they play what they think gives them the best chance of the result they are after.
I don't even think that a "minimum of preparation" is an attraction of the Rubinstein, because even though it collapses the Tarrasch and Classical variations into one, white's choices are rather wide. I don't find the Rubinstein to be a particularly practical opening choice given this and the factors you mentioned but there are others who disagree I am sure.
May 19, 2019
0
#70
SchaakVoorAlles wrote:
dpcjsr wrote:
<snip> you are faced with struggling for equality deep into the game and small mistakes can lead to losing games <snip>
Exactly. That is why I gave up on it. Why do all that work, just to struggle to get a draw?
Well you have to struggle to get a draw anyway if white plays well 
I'd rather play a "boring" draw knowing I'm playing near-optimal moves than win as black knowing both sides made serious errors. Of course currently I'm nowhere near the level of playing optimally in any opening, but I feel that with hard work it can be possible to play the Rubinstein at a very high level, especially as I've seen IMs that don't really have anything prepared against the opening.
All following this thread should be aware that there is a "French Vs Sicilian" correspondence match going on right now:
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/french-vs-sicilian-1
This is after a "French Vs Caro-Kann" correspondence match was won decisively by Team French. There is a lot of misinformation out there on the French Defense, which is far more aggressive and tenacious than its popular reputation would suggest.
It's a great weapon for an attacking player. As @pfren has suggested here, I play the Rubinstein against both 3. Nc3 and 3. Nd2. The "space advantage" which the computer analyzes in white's favor is really just a ripe target, easily blockaded and attacked on the open d-file.
It depends if you do the french defense that will be harder for the opponent but in the same way it ruins your development but the sicilian it is a really uncommon move most players don't know how to even defend against it and it also increases your chances of win and also developes your peices in a unique way the sicilian was played by Viswanathan Anand
Indian chess grandmaster against Rameshbabu Praggnanandhaa
Indian chess grandmaster. Praggnanandhaa did the austian attack and Viswanathan Anand did the sicilian and at the end of the game Viswanathan Anand won so thats why I recomend doing the sicilian but one thing the sicilian can lead to many of whites traps so you better be careful in a matter of few mover you can lose your rook.
Jun 19, 2022
0
#73
(From my point of view)
On 1) e4 : 1)... c5 and 1)...e5 = opening for gosu = not to play except if you are gosu
Sicilian Defense
I think it won't be very difficult to convince rational people why we shouldn't play this opening if we are not a gosu.
a) 1) e4-c5 2) d4-cxd4 3) c3-dxc3 4) Nxc3 unbearable gambit where we have the impression to undergo the whole game with quite formidable sacrifices of rook. In short, 1) e4-c5 2) d4-cxd4 3) c3-d3 can be ok
b) 1) e4-c5 2) b4 the game hasn't started and we already feel bad. Fortunately wing gambit is little played and let's hope it's not played.
c) 1) e4-c5 2) f4 we don't play 2)...d5 and clearly we find ourselves facing a super Sicilian for White.
d) 1) e4-c5 2) c3 it is often because of the Alapine variant that we stop playing the Sicilian. Evgeny Svechnikov wrote a book on how to win the Sicilian with the Alapine variant.
e) 1) e4-c5 2) Nf3-Nc6 3) Bb5 or 1) e4-c5 2) Nf3-d6 3) Bb5 + no comment
f) 1) e4-c5 2) Nc3-Nc6 3) g3 can be ok but "the East-Indian attacks", o-o-o vs o-o or "timorous game", it's to be studied and I believe there are plenty of players who play Sicilian closed.
g) 1) e4-c5 2) b3 that is bonus as if it wasn't enough.
And obviously if you spend your time studying these instead of the main ones, it will be even worse because obviously the main ones are more formidable.
I play both. I go for a French first and if they don't play 2.d4 then I go into a Sicilian
I find it very useful to have two repertoires when your opponent plays the Exchange Variation and you want to change things up
Jun 22, 2022
0
#77
Ambo0o wrote:
Petroff defence
Why do people do this in every thread about an opening? Come up with some totally unconnected other opening to shout out?
Jun 22, 2022
0
#78
DrSpudnik wrote:
Ambo0o wrote:
Petroff defence
Why do people do this in every thread about an opening? Come up with some totally unconnected other opening to shout out?
NIMZO-INDIAN DEFENSE
Has TheChessAnalyst been here since 2015?