Nah, that's my point: power is not psychological only or only perception. Power has to be backed up by something real like physical, financial, social.. etc. And such power overcomes resistance through force. And overcoming resistance does not prove that it is useful.
PS: I know about 'out of Africa' theory. But, I think it is bogus.😎
Is the "Sicilian french variation" the best variation in the Sicilian defence?
Stockfish recommends pushing the e pawn.
Even by accident, you should be better than this...
agagaga
https://youtu.be/-AdSN6CpuWQ
Saw a few people saying there is no sicilian french variation..lol.. this is incredibly funny!
Saw a few people saying there is no sicilian french variation..lol.. this is incredibly funny!
They’re right though. It’s just the 2… e6 Sicilian, same as the 2… d6 and 2… Nc6 Sicilians don’t have names, or the 3. Nc3 French isn’t named. It’s because that move isn’t the thematic move.
This, as I understand it, is the Franco-Sicilian. If White now plays 3.Nf3 it transposes into a regular Sicilian, but White has other options, such as 3,d5.
Well, 3. d5 is a straightforward Benoni where white is regarded as much better because c4 wasn't played, so of course, that's normally thought of as a transposition to a 1. d4 opening. Moral: don't try to play the Sicilian the wrong way round.
Taimanov considered the opening 1. e4 ...c5 2. Nf3 ...e6 to be the Paulsen Variation of the Sicilian and he wrote an entire book on it, published in the 80s by Batsford. He classified his own defence, the Taimanov Variation, as a sub-variation of the Paulsen Sicilian. Nowadays, many masters consider 1. e4 ...c5 2. Nf3 ...e6 to be a Kan but that's inaccurate because Kan played a very early a6 and b6, often on moves 4 and 5. They don't know their history of openings.
I like this way of classifying openings by pawn structures, it makes sense intuitively.
The moves 1.e4 c5 2.f4 e6 appear in the Doazan manuscript, and hence are credited to Giulio Cesare Polerio, the originator of many lines that are still popular today.
C5, E6 is the French Sicilian look it up!
There not right!
Keep thinking there's not a line for the French Sicilian and when it's played against you. You will be like a lost puppy and lose. Because you weren't prepared!
Keep thinking there's not a line for the French Sicilian and when it's played against you. You will be like a lost puppy and lose. Because you weren't prepared!
Lol forgive me for trusting the players who literally know who invented each line of your so-called “French Sicilian” and can name the best way to play against each of them over someone who doesn’t even know the difference between “they’re” and “there”
Names are just names and nothing more. Very often in chess, someone tries to affix a name to a variation in the hope that he or she will be remembered for it. People who are obsessed with names should probably study naming conventions and they should see that naming variations is a sort of off-the-board ego-battle for prestige.
On a more interesting note, why do I keep getting the comment "Nice comeback win" in Chess.com blitz, when I was never losing. Is it prejudiced against counter-attacking players or what?
I’ve often gotten this “nice comeback” comment when an error gave my opponent a chance for a slight advantage on a single move, but I was otherwise better from start to finish. The AI is not really AI, or it is stupid AI.
Like Dawkins' "memes", in fact. "Meme" is completely useless as a concept but nevertheless powerful in the sense that it attracts attention.
Memes are social ridicule by mob.