FREE - In Google Play
FREE - in Win Phone Store
By that logic, chess itself is for chess experts. Which in a way it is, the struggle is making it to that expert level so that you can actually compete and play the game "properly."
I never expected this topic to become so popular.
For the record, I've recently been looking at the Taimanov. It looks like it's the safest and easiest Sicilian to play. Then again, I could be totally wrong.
If the Caro-Kann was as good as you say then every GM would use it. In fact, it seems to be possible for white to get the forced endgame advantage.I was under the impression that if black blocks the Bb5+ with the N then c4, holding the pawn, is viable, so that black must block with the B. I may be wrong on this. My memory isn't so good these days.
... the Taimanov. It looks like it's the safest and easiest Sicilian to play. Then again, I could be totally wrong.
There was a book about it, called "The Safest Sicilian". Later on, it became "The Most Flexible Sicilian. "The Easiest Sicilian" was about the Sveshnikov. And there was also "The Lazy Man's Sicilian" ...
there are some how many variations on n Sicilian
its just a opening
think it positively..... this opening is made for all not for any experts or any bigenners
if u want a extra knowledge about Sicilian
I will describe some variations in Sicilian
their are dragon,nimzx,richer rouser,taimonov,shevizen,and many more
some how guides its just nice that we are discussing my favorite opening
OK nice to meet u friends?
There was a book about it, called "The Safest Sicilian". Later on, it became "The Most Flexible Sicilian. "The Easist Sicilian" was about the Sveshnikov. And there was also "The Lazy Man's Sicilian" ...
Taimanov considered his variation to be the purest from a strategic perspective. He didn't necessarily mean that as a compliment though. He just meant that it was the easiest to understand. He also believed that the players of the White side often had a hard time adjusting to that style of play instead of the ultra concrete lines of the Najdorf and other variations.
You can find his comments about the relative merits of his variation compared to others in his book, Winning with the Sicilian, and also in his Taimanov's Selected Games. Those who are obsessed with names of openings will probably come away confused. Taimanov defined the various lines of the Paulsen, Kan and Taimanov differently than Wikipedia does.
I don't want you to do anything other than substantiate your claim. You were telling us about a forced endgame advantage for white. Where is it? Did you make it up? Perhaps a Golden Eagle swooped down and grabbed it from your hand and flew away with it to some inaccessible craggy pinnacle? The only intellectually lazy person here seems to be you! for you make statements and then expect others to substantiate them for you. Either you show us the forced endgame advantage as YOU have claimed or retract your statement and admit that you made it up.
Here is your claim again lest you have forgotten it. "In fact, it seems to be possible for white to get the forced endgame advantage." - Optimissed
Going back to Taimanov, he argues that the semi-open c-file gives *Black* a structural advantage in the endgame. But, he also points out that before then, White has a nice dynamic edge that needs to be neutralized.
It seems to me its like this. Against the King pawn you play 1...e5 when you don't want to lose, you play 1..c6 when all you need is a draw and you play 1...c5 when you must win.
This is the nature of the Sicilian, its either kill or be killed. Black has in theory at least in the open Sicilian better pawns going into the endgame, a two v one central advantage, also the chance of a minority attack. White in theory usually has a lead in development (if black pushes pawns like in the Najdorf), more space and good attacking chances. In the Dragon its a trade off, black gets better pawns but a hopelessly weak d5 square. Its this double edged quality that I suspect appeals to Sicilian players and other types of riverboat gamblers.
I would also be very interested in some clarification of this "forced endgame advantage", as it is not something of which I've been previously aware.
@robbie_1969: Here's an example of a line in the Caro-Kann where Black plays perfectly according to theory and yet White gets a slight endgame advantage.
According to theory? actually there are to my knowledge two perspectives here, a white queen side majority which is supposed to confer on the owner a slight advantage and the advanced h pawn which just may become a liability for white and a target for black. Although this is a thread about the Sicilian and i don't want to derail it, there are certain things that cannot go left unsaid.
white king is dancing about like Nicki Minaj.