Some thirty something years ago? Since [pfren] has the book and read it, probably a good idea to listen to him?
However, other players, some even more highly rated and prestigious than pfren, say otherwise.
As Patrick Swayze said in Roadhouse, "Opinions vary."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeglesB0qDk
Indeed. My System is one of the most comprehensive, definitive books on Abstract thinking by one of the.greatest Chess thinkers. One of my ex-gf loved reading it because of the way he wrote, not because she could understand any of it's concepts. Heh. Anyways, while I still use many of it's axioms, principles...I too agree, although a great read, it's not one of my favorites. I'll only recommend it to players who have read other books and are already proficient technical players themselves. Simply as a change up, a break from the norm you might say. To be inspired by this work, to become creative thinkers themselves instead of being stuck in rut in an imaginative sense.
For me, I don't like the negativism which sort of permeates throughout. Like how Petrosian at his best plays. Not to lose. Prophylaxis & overprotection speaks to this way of playing. It's only my opinion. I like dynamism. Giving life to a position, not taking it away.
Just me, I guess.
Heh. When I see 4. Qxd4, I often smile to myself. Or even 5. f3. Knowing I win a tempo by attacking the Q with a developmental move is comforting. Doesn't mean I've equalized, true, but it sure makes my job easier.
Sure, the PPV requires some memorization of key lines but also by White. Some have related that in order to learn another language, you have to learn proper vocabulary, dialect, slang probably amounting to memorizing 1000's of words. I've realized that in everyday life, they themselves don't use a 100 or more in conversation. Memorization is essential but not the end all. If you're familiar with the Ideas & strategy. Familiarize oneself through study & by experience, you can play any line without knowing latest theory or going through reams of variations.
There are alternatives to the commonly played move. Some lead to a slight plus, balanced, unclear equal but those evals are just guides. You can play a move frowned upon by experts and still win. Because it's not the move that dictates the outcome, it's the moves after, the way your opponent is playing too that ultimately decides.
Does that sound simple or what? Heh.
11...f5 is what Black should play, but personally I wouldn't opt for something like this as Black: proper defence is far from easy.
What about this f5 http://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/nimzowitschs-defense-answer-to-d4-d5-nc3?page=5
I encountered this opening not so long ago. The only thing I remembered was that white should play Bb5 and occupy e5... the game did not last long lol.
If you want to play something tricky that's fine, but ideally your tricks will require some work from your opponent.
The sicilian is the worst opening you can play at club level. You're just wasting your time with it because sooner or later you'll have to abandon it."
This is not at all my experience.
I have beaten players who outrate me by quite a lot with the sicilain [as black] and it is not uncommon for players who play the open sicilian against me to never do it again.
But then again, I am a bit like a poor man's Svidler. I don't know my lines to move 40, but I do know them better than those i play against, and have a lot of experience with the sorts of middle games you get.
My System is a useful book, but it needs to be taken with a pinch of salt. I personally find it too dogmatic. For example, snatching a pawn in the opening and/or bringing the Queen out early for him are sins, but so many times they are perfectly playable if you can calculate concretely...
...Or you have some time to waste and you memorize the Najdorf poisoned pawn. Just to get back to the thread ;)
...Or you have some time to waste and you memorize the Najdorf poisoned pawn. Just to get back to the thread ;)
If you add the documented stuff from engine rooms, you just have a few hundreds of thousands of games to memorize in the poisoned pawn... this will be very useful, unless your opponent cowardly deviates at move six (which is the usual thing to happen). In that case, just resign, and sue him!
Another fact I'm not sure if anyone has mentioned yet, if you're an e4 player you're going to need to know some Sicilian theory anyway unless you want to get crushed by the very opening the OP says we shouldn't play. To become a good player you must have an understanding of all the best openings and study all aspects of the game. My Sicilian studies have helped me from the white side of the board too. Just ask the last guy that tried the Dragon against me😁
White needs to memorize theory only if he wants to go all out (i.e. O-O-O). But there are many quiet systems for white in the open sicilian. If you think you've automatically equalized if white plays stuff like Be2 and O-O I'm afraid you're overestimating the sicilian and its counterplay.
Hey, white can even play 4.Qxd4 and you are still not equal.
The same can be said for black in that case.
... @Plutonia In regards to your original post, it reads like someone who tried an opening and it didn't work for them so now they bash the whole opening.
I play the Accelerated Dragon and need to know very little theory. The Accelerated Dragon is a Sicilian that's not the worst, but the BEST opening to play at club level. At club level people know what the Dragon and Yugoslav Attack is but not many realize the difference between the normal Dragon and Accelerated, thus they often try the Yugoslav Attack set up anyway and end up a tempi down from normal lines or just dropping a pawn or even two, right in the opening. And also when people try the Maroczy Bind against it they often have no idea what they're doing and do things like trade the dark square bishops off and leave themselves with a bad light square bishop. A good knight vs bad bishop endgame is one I've enjoyed several times from the Maroczy Bind. So there goes your entire argument about how the Sicilian is terrible for club players to employ. Maybe you should have been more specific in your thread title and called it "LOL at the Najdorf" or whatever it was you meant.
wtf ylblai
Heh. When I see 4. Qxd4, I often smile to myself. Or even 5. f3. Knowing I win a tempo by attacking the Q with a developmental move is comforting. Doesn't mean I've equalized, true, but it sure makes my job easier.
Sure, the PPV requires some memorization of key lines but also by White. Some have related that in order to learn another language, you have to learn proper vocabulary, dialect, slang probably amounting to memorizing 1000's of words. I've realized that in everyday life, they themselves don't use a 100 or more in conversation. Memorization is essential but not the end all. If you're familiar with the Ideas & strategy. Familiarize oneself through study & by experience, you can play any line without knowing latest theory or going through reams of variations.
There are alternatives to the commonly played move. Some lead to a slight plus, balanced, unclear equal but those evals are just guides. You can play a move frowned upon by experts and still win. Because it's not the move that dictates the outcome, it's the moves after, the way your opponent is playing too that ultimately decides.
Does that sound simple or what? Heh.
wtf ylblai
Thought I would try to unravel two more-or-less independent discussions. It turned out to be somewhat more complicated than I originally thought it would be.
My first read of "My System" was back in 1976, when I was 17 y.o. and a Candidate Master (never got the title of National Master). I found this being an interesting read, although it was apparent to me that many things were written as a mere provocation. By that time, I also read Reti's "Modern Ideas In Chess" and a Petrosian games collection. Surely enough I have learned more from both of them than Nimzo- actually I don't believe he really wrote the book as a didactic text.
My Russian copy of "My System" is priceless because it is a collectors item. Apparently this is too hard for x_patzer to understand...
Regarding 4.Qxd4, AKA the Hungarian/ Chekhover variation: Many 2700+ players are employing it, so dismissals like "loses a tempo" are naive at best. Won't go into details, since it would be off-topic.
My first read of "My System" was back in 1976, when I was 17 y.o. and a Candidate Master (never got the title of National Master). I found this being an interesting read, although it was apparent to me that many things were written as a mere provocation. By that time, I also read Reti's "Modern Ideas In Chess" and a Petrosian games collection. Surely enough I have learned more from both of them than Nimzo- actually I don't believe he really wrote the book as a didactic text.
My Russian copy of "My System" is priceless because it is a collectors item. Apparently this is too hard for x_patzer to understand...
Regarding 4.Qxd4, AKA the Hungarian/ Chekhover variation: Many 2700+ players are employing it, so dismissals like "loses a tempo" are naive at best. Won't go into details, since it would be off-topic.
It is not hard for me to understand!
It is a collectors item because it is a classic!
People value it because it has value in it.
If the book was trash it would not be priceless.
You telling people not to read a classic is nonsense.
Every chess player should read it.
You believe they should not read it and instead read Reti's "Modern Ideas In Chess".
Well guess what I think they should read them all!
Do you guys want this thread to be like something out of the movie, The Fly, with a mixture of the components of Nimzowitsch and the laughing Sicilian?
Do you guys want this thread to be like something out of the movie, The Fly, with a mixture of the components of Nimzowitsch and the laughing Sicilian?
Well I thought this was a Troll thread.
The OP never asked a question.
The Title of this thread is a statement.
Which bascially means the OP is laughing at the Sicilian.
I was laughing at Pfren for making such a crazy statement.
I thought I was on topic the whole time?
The OP is laughing at the Sicilian.
I am laughing at Pfren.
Me and the OP can switch up if he wants too.
I can laugh at the Sicilian.
He can laugh at Pfren.
I thought I was on topic this whole time.
Are you suggesting we are off topic?
"Help me!" - fly
Seriously, some seem to want to discuss the Sicilian here. Why not let them have their fun without major interruption?
"Help me!" - fly
Seriously, some seem to want to discuss the Sicilian here. Why not let them have there fun without major interruption?
If it makes you feel better.
I can talk about the Sicilian.
I think it is great!
I wrote an article on it!
http://www.chess.com/blog/X_PLAYER_J_X/sicilian-defence2
Nigel Short is a more trustworthy authority than Reynolds. Some books don't stand the test of time...
It has nothing to do with trustworthy!
The book "My System" was written by Aron Nimzowitsch.
Aron Nimzowitsch is a chess legend.
The Father of Hyper-Modern Chess!
The book expresses his thoughts and ideas of chess.
Thoughts and ideas which were never heard of before during "His time".
Not everything stands up to the test of time because some new ideas improve on the old ones.
However, He was the original!
You are learning from Aron Nimzowitsch.
You are learning from what he believed was the right way of playing!
Finding out what is right or wrong is part of the learning experince.
Even if everything Aron Nimzowitsch said is wrong.
You should still read this book!!
WHY?
Because it is like a small glimpse into the mind of one of the most famous chess players in history.
Where esle can you gain insight on what Aron Nimzowitsch was thinking?
It is his own words!
I would of loved reading books by Harry Nelson Pillsbury.
A US Chess champion!
Harry Nelson Pillsbury had a even score against Lasker!
They believed he was going to be the next World Champion.
I believe he would of been the next World Champion.
He had an illness which called him to die at such a young age!
What do you guys and gals think of Harry Nelson Pillsbury ideas in chess?
Do you think they are wrong?
Oh forgive me that is right Harry Nelson Pillsbury never wrote a book!
He died before he could ever express his thoughts or ideas on chess.
The stuff we know of Harry Nelson Pillsbury comes from others!
The saddest thing in chess is not ideas which end up turning bad by new modern chess theory!
The saddest thing in chess is ideas which have been lost to time!
They were never shared!
They were never expressed!
It happens in chess.
It is very sad.
This is one example of a chess player who has been lost by time.
Hundreds of thousands of chess players end up like this.
Many of them have wonderful stories.
Stories which were never told!
It is a privilege to have insight from the mind of Aron Nimzowitsch.
A privilege which we do not have from the mind of Harry Nelson Pillsbury.
What about Jackson Whipps Showalter?
5 - time US Chess Champion!
Known as "The Kentucky Lion" due to his birth place and hair style.
A line is named after him in the Queens Gambit Accepted.
Here is a game he won against Lasker!
"The Kentucky Lion" attacking!
That game was played in the US Championship in 1897.
Black is playing the Berlin Defense.
A Modern line in 1897!
The Kentucky Lion avoided the dreaded Berlin Wall Endgame!
The line he played is called the l'Herment Variation.
Jackson Whipps Showalter wrote no books!
People would love to read books by some of these chess players and don't even have the chance to because they didn't write any.
The few books we do have to read people are advicing not to read?
It is outrageous and there is no way they are ever going to convince me what they are saying is right!
It is a crying shame!