Opening of the Day: Smith-Morra Gambit

The Smith-Morra Gambit is wildly popular on the amateur level. It offers White attacking play at the cost of a pawn. Is the compensation enough to justify this impudence? That's as yet undecided.

IM Marc Esserman has breathed new life into this gambit with his popular book, "Mayhem in the Morra." Here is one of his games which is likely to inspire fans of this opening.

Learn more and discuss in our openings explorer: https://www.chess.com/openings/B21_Sicilian_Defense_Smith_Morra_Gambit_Accepted_4.Nxc3

Craappp.

How is @Dailyfun not logged in in 22 days but yet he posted this thread 2 hours ago?

It's extremely cliché to cite the Esserman-Van Wely game with regards to the Morra. It just shows that if you are a strong IM and you create enough tricks in many games against super-GMs, eventually one will fall for them. That doesn't make it a great opening, and it's also easily declined leading into c3 Sicilian positions...which means you have to do more work as white. 

Of course it's not a bad gambit and when I played the Sicilian as black I would always decline it and go into c3 Sicilian positions which I knew very well, and actually several very good friends of mine who are stronger than I am enjoy playing it, but I am not sure of its value for players above maybe 2000 or so. 

It's a bot created to post forum topics about stuff real staff members don't dare to.

Everyone is gonna start posting mating attacks against it, you dont want to see those.

It's not a great opening but a GM lost to it? I don't understand.

I don't think the Morra is the greatest thing since sliced bread or garbage either for that matter. Is there a refutation about?

Instead of 17. Bg5!!, 17. Bf7+, Kd1, 18. Bb6+ force mate?

3...d3 also gives mutual chances.

3...d3 semi - busts the Morra, and 3...Nf6 just obliterates it completely.

 @Optimissed, you may want to update your theory. 3...Nf6 transposes into a very well respected line of the Alapin, in fact, Sveshnikov which wrote a book on it thinks it is the best reply.

And yes, White should set up a Maroczy Bind against d3 declinations, but the Maroczy stopped being dangerous a long time ago.

Like I could get destroyed in the Black side of a Maroczy, but it will not be because White has an advantage, it will be because I played like crap.

The bishop is horrible on d3! Give White his money back!!!!

3...d3 is a rather illogical declination of the gambit IMO because I don't understand why black would voluntarily go into such a structure.

^umm actually d3 is a pretty good way to play

1, black's structure is good! idk why u think black wouldn't want it... i mean u realize it's the same structure as the dragon variation and like all the other open sicilians except white can't attack bc the c pawn has to block a piece

2, this is probably the most important, but black's moves r all automatic... just do d6,g6,Nf6,Bg7,Nd7,sometimes b6 Bb7 and there's never any problems. Having easy moves is more important than having a better position, if ur not a very very high level (and i mean at any time control)

also, if u check with the computer (i use stockfish, and i think this engine likes space a lot compared to other engines, so it's gna favor white a bit more) white has like a big advantage at first, but then if u make all the best computer moves, it goes down to pretty much white having almost no advantage at all

so actually i disagree if someone says this is an inferior maroczy bind (the thing where u have pawns on c4 and e4)... in a normal maroczy bind, which i've played a lot, i don't think black can win if white plays decent moves (aka it's much easier to play white than black in a lot of binds, but here black has the easiest plan)

Because we like living on the Maroczy edge.