yea Larsen said that
sell me on 1...e5
Sort:
Yeah, but Larsen also said: "If you play the Caro-Kann when you are young, then what would you play when you are old?"
Some of us want to have a more exciting game, and therefore the Sicilian is a good answer.
Larsen also happened to be one of the leading exponents of the Sicilian (which he played much more often than the Caro), so just because he said it's anti-positional doesn't mean it's not fun to play :)
I like to play d4 ( Scandinavian ) I have also played the Sicilian Dragon some although my opponent usually launches a strong attack on my kingside. The caro-kann is a opening I would strongly recommend to new players because most scholastic level players won't have seen it before. I've never really looked at the French Defense very much but it looks very sturdy. And the Petroff Defense is a solid game too... the Russians like it a lot. But most people play e5 because it is the move they've seen the most of and played the most. --FifthDimension
Conquistador wrote:
If you find 1.e4 e5 is boring, you really do not know how to play it.
Of course that is true of basically every opening, which is what is nice about chess. It's just that you usually have to understand an opening or position to appreciate and like it. There is not one opening at the moment that I find really boring. Sure I have my favorites, but I appreciate the tactical and strategical elements as a whole, as no opening position is easy to play perfectly. Otherwise chess wouldn't be such a hard game.
RainbowRising wrote:
I can honestly say that I do not understand the Sicilian from either side. It seems to go against all opening theory and principles, especially the najdorf - black spends all his time moving pawns! In fact, even whites 3rd move, d4, confuses me - why am I voluntarily giving black my d pawn for his c pawn? To me none of it makes much sense.
I never learnt the Ruy from either side. As black against e4 I play c6 and made it all the way to 1900 without ever replying to e4 with either e5 or c5.
PS if anyone is willing to explain the sicilian to me/the room, feel free!
Black can make a lot of pawn moves because of his solid, flexible center pawns, blunting out some f white's open lines, so it's nice: these pawns cover squares really well, and at the same time can become active if one or both push to the 4th rank, plus black gets the c file. But at the same time white gets an advantage in space and easier development so attacks can easily happen from him. At the moment it is he who controls more of the center, with a pawn actually within the 4 center squares as well as a knight.
So black by playing ...c5 prepares to go into this imbalanced structure as a counter if white should play the logical plan of d4. If white doesn't go d4 I think black can be happy with the fact that white's pieces don't get into the game super quick like in the open lines, and that also means black doesn't have to give up his c5 foothold.
I can only agree fully with RainbowRisings last post, wasn't it Bent Larsen who joked that the Sicilian was anti-positional, giving up a center pawn on move 3 for apparently no reason.