"which is pretty much the case for most openings that almost no top players play on a regular basis TODAY"
Totally irrelevant.
Fashion and old fashioned don't rhyme with good and bad...
Anyway ylblai, u discuss all alone, not considering what others say (did u read me when i said some strong GM play it nowadays??).
The Closed Sicilian is just fine - for both White and Black. The lines are not extremely theoretical, they are more idea-based (for both colors I might add), and simply allow the better player the better chances. I can imagine GMs regurarly play the Closed Sicilian versus lower rated opposition, since playing 25 moves of theory versus those players is hardly the way to go.
... Yes , Greg Shahade's opinion count's more than Spassky's and Balashov's for idiots and people that have never read a book in their life.
I have no doubt at all about that.
p.s. I suppose you will have a quote of a sub-average player for every great player I will mention.
So let's see:
Smyslov , World Champion and Keres 5 times second in Candidates tournament (called from many uncrowned king) also used Closed Sicilian regularly.In Balashov's book Smyslov's and Keres' analysis often mentioned and there is a whole chapter in Keres' 2.Ne2 that could turn to either open or closed Sicilian.
Nikola Mitkov plays Closed Sicilian against everybody.
In chessgames database there are 43 games.
He has 21 wins , 16 draws and only 6 defeats.These are hardly the results of a line that is "harmless".
Some Nikola Mitkov victories after 1 e4 c5 2 Nc3:
2010 against Ali Al Sulaiti (with a rating 397 points lower)
2011 against Paul A Gallegos (with a rating 441 points lower)
2011 against Robert Presswood (USCF rating: 1674)
2012 against Joshua Colas (with a rating 401 points lower)
2014 against Yoel Estarling Polanco Nunez (with a rating 343 points lower)
"In the first match, Smyslov answered the Sicilian with his favourite Closed Sicilian Variation. Both games ended in defeat, which may be the reason he now abandons the Closed and chooses something else." - Mikhail Botvinnik, commenting on the second game of his 1957 match with Smyslov
Some games with the move of Yuri Balashov after 1 e4 c5:
2011 against Tatiana Kosintseva: 2. Nc3
2011 against Sergey Mikhailov: 2. Nf3
2012 against Janez Barle: 2. Nf3
2014 against Adrian Marcovici: 2. b3
Some games with the move of Nigel Short after 1 e4 c5:
2015 against Junta Ikeda: 2. Nf3
2015 against Garry Kasparov: 2. Nf3
2015 against Garry Kasparov: 2. Nc3
2015 against Sergei Movsesian: 2. Nf3
2016 against Nino Maisuradze: 2. Nf3
2016 against Aleksei Kulashko: 2. Nf3
Some games with the move of Magnus Carlsen after 1 e4 c5:
2015 against Yifan Hou: 2. Nf3
2015 against Ivan Saric: 2.Nf3
2015 against Arkadij Naiditsch: 2. Nf3
2015 against Wesley So: 2. Nf3
2015 against Alexander Grischuk: 2.Nf3
2015 against Vladimir Akopian: 2. Nf3
2015 against Maxime Vachier-Lagrave: 2. Nf3
... It is amazing how few you understand from what you read.So because Smyslov failed with closed Sicilian against Botvinnik , it's not a good line
I am not responsible for assertions that I did not make.
(Smyslov continue to play Closed Sicilian after the match).
How many examples can jengaias find of Smyslov Closed Sicilian use (against ANY opponent) during 1955-1957 (the years after the lost game mentioned by Botvinnik)? How often did Smyslov use the Closed Sicilian after 1957?
So because Kasparov's Ruy Lopez , NimzoIndian and Grunfeld failed against Kramnik that means Ruy Lopez , NimzoIndian and Grunfeld are not good openings!!!
Do I even need to try to refute that nonsense?
Let''s not forget that the Botvinnik quote is just part of the picture. Some recent highlights from this thread:
... Surprisingly Spassky stopped playing Closed Sicilian at 1971 and started again at 1976 although it is possible that he used Closed Sicilian in other Soviet tournaments that are not in databases. ...
"In the 1990s the Closed Sicilian considerably lost its popularity for several reasons. First of all, its previous adherents, such as Smyslov, Hort, and especially Spassky, ceased to develop it, and other players failed to impress with it. Secondly, Black has found clear ways to parry White's active intentions." - GM Dorian Rogozenko (2003)
"The Closed Sicilian is not an especially good opening, which is pretty much the case for most openings that almost no top players play on a regular basis TODAY. What people did 50 years ago is irrelevant. That's not to say that someone like Short, or Adams won't trot it out for a single game here and there, but almost no one uses it as their exclusive answer to the Sicilian, which generally means it's not very good.
If top players aren't playing it, it's usually not good. Sometimes there will be exceptions, but they are rare and you'd need good evidence to back it up. Honestly if I know someone is playing the Closed Sicilian, I can pick one of probably 5-6 lines, each of which I can learn in probably 15 minutes, and expect to get a fully playable position without much difficulty." - IM Greg Shahade (2012)
Finally ,
Noone EVER said that 2.Nc3 is THE BEST move against Sicilian
Does jengaias imagine that anyone claimed that someone said that 2.Nc3 is THE BEST move against the Sicilian?
and noone will be stupid enough to say such thing.It is of course understandable that 2.Nf3 is more popular , but all non-popular lines ARE NOT UNPLAYABLE
Does jengaias imagine that anyone claimed that 2.Nc3 is unplayable?
That is what we try to say.Closed Sicilian is perfectly playable and very interesting.Playable enough to be employed even by World Champions.
"I am unwilling to teach someone how to play something like the Grand Prix attack, the Closed Sicilian, the Schleimann Defense. These are all ok openings as a surprise from time to time, but if you play them 100% of the time, you are severely hampering your chess development." - IM Greg Shahade (2012)
It is easy enough even for a 5 year old kid to understand what we say.Why you don't understand it, is no mystery.But why you don't even try to show that you are capable of even the slightest understanding is indeed a mystery(are you sure you are 1500 USCF?I have seen 1200 chess.com players that understand more.Is it so easy to get 1500 USCF?).
p.s.For the rest that have near average intelligence and can understand:
It is also a quite flexible system.Some superificial study of Mitkov's games showed that white gets very interesting positions with 2...d6 3.f4(Grand Prix attack) and 2...Nc6 3.Bb5 (Mitkov plays that a lot, I am not sure if it can still be called Closed Sicilian but it's not Closed Sicilian in the traditional sense).
Again: Some Nikola Mitkov victories after 1 e4 c5 2 Nc3:
2010 against Ali Al Sulaiti (with a rating 397 points lower)
2011 against Paul A Gallegos (with a rating 441 points lower)
2011 against Robert Presswood (USCF rating: 1674)
2012 against Joshua Colas (with a rating 401 points lower)
2014 against Yoel Estarling Polanco Nunez (with a rating 343 points lower)
Stop quoting Greg Shahade, he's known for saying nonsense. If the closed Sicilian was bad it wouldn't ever be used by strong players. It's not hampering your chess development to play something other than main line theory.
Stop quoting Greg Shahade, he's known for saying nonsense. If the closed Sicilian was bad
I do not see "bad", in the IM Greg Shahade quotes.
"The Closed Sicilian is not an especially good opening, which is pretty much the case for most openings that almost no top players play on a regular basis TODAY. What people did 50 years ago is irrelevant. That's not to say that someone like Short, or Adams won't trot it out for a single game here and there, but almost no one uses it as their exclusive answer to the Sicilian, which generally means it's not very good.
If top players aren't playing it, it's usually not good. Sometimes there will be exceptions, but they are rare and you'd need good evidence to back it up. Honestly if I know someone is playing the Closed Sicilian, I can pick one of probably 5-6 lines, each of which I can learn in probably 15 minutes, and expect to get a fully playable position without much difficulty." - IM Greg Shahade (2012)
"I am unwilling to teach someone how to play something like the Grand Prix attack, the Closed Sicilian, the Schleimann Defense. These are all ok openings as a surprise from time to time, but if you play them 100% of the time, you are severely hampering your chess development." - IM Greg Shahade (2012)
it wouldn't ever be used by strong players. It's not hampering your chess development to play something other than main line theory.
It may surprise you that I have a lot of sympathy with that. I think it depends on how much development one is hoping to have. In another thread, I have mentioned a quote that I should perhaps have mentioned here.
"If you really want to be great at chess someday, or want to be above 2000-2200, you will greatly help yourself by playing main lines and serious openings. If you don't have these ambitions, you can basically play whatever you want as long as you know something about it." - IM Greg Shahade (2012)
lolurspammed wrote:
"That would imply all strong players only play main lines."
IM Greg Shahade wrote, "... greatly help yourself ...". He did not write, "... only achieve your obective ...".
Also, IM Greg Shahade wrote, "... great at chess ... or ... above 2000-2200 ...". He did not write, "... a strong player ...".
Short made is first choice weapon against sicilian i think (so many games in databases), with tremendous results.
But its clear, Shahade or you have better understanding than many GM playing regularly closed siclian against anybody...
Rogozenko nevertheless is another guy and his recommendations are quite good i have to confess, but no as good as he pretends, like most repertoire books he is very optimistic so not so objective.
Instead of trying to refute what others say, u should try to understand why they say it, and not talking "blindly".
Hopeless talk anyway, i think u don't know what u are talking about, u use quote because u have no choice.
Dit : what u wrote about Mitkow games is completely wrong. I don't know what database u use but he has many many games on 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 recently, beating some GM like Lenderman...
IM poucin wrote:
"Short made is first choice weapon against sicilian i think (so many games in databases), with tremendous results."
How frequently do we see him trying to have more of these tremondous results?
IM poucin wrote:
"But its clear, Shahade or you have better understanding than many GM playing regularly closed siclian against anybody..."
Certainly not me, but who are the GMs playing the Closed Sicilian regularly and successfully against anybody?
IM poucin wrote:
"Rogozenko nevertheless is another guy and his recommendations are quite good i have to confess, but no as good as he pretends, like most repertoire books he is very optimistic so not so objective."
Well, here is another quote: "Mickey Adams has been quoted as saying that he feels the thing that really holds him back is that he didn't play the main lines as White (particularly the Open Sicilian) early enough in his career." - IM John Cox (2006)
IM poucin wrote:
"Instead of trying to refute what others say, u should try to understand why they say it, and not talking 'blindly'."
I am not trying to refute what others say, but I do think that there is room to give more of the picture.
IM poucin wrote:
"Hopeless talk anyway, i think u don't know what u are talking about, u use quote because u have no choice."
I make no claims to authority. I see nothing wrong with reporting some stuff.
IM poucin wrote:
"Dit : what u wrote about Mitkow games is completely wrong."
Do you dispute what I wrote about the Ali Al Sulaiti game, the Paul A Gallegos game, the Robert Presswood game, the Joshua Colas game, the Yoel Estarling Polanco Nunez game, all of them, or what?
IM poucin wrote:
"I don't know what database u use but he has many many games on 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 recently, beating some GM like Lenderman..."
Beating "some GM" like Lenderman? Doesn't that sound as though other victims were lower rated?
And, while we are on the subject of correction, are any second thoughts appropriate about, "Spassky championned it with great results (when he was world champion...)"?
Greg Shahade 's opinion on anything chess related is irrelevant due to his time control idiocy. If top players don't play it, it means it's bad?? Top players only play 1.e5 vs e4, therefore all other moves are bad??
Glad I came across this thread. I've started playing the closed sicilian with good results despite not being particularly knowledgeable on the difference between variations (the importance of this was pointed out to me by an opponent who played a different setup than I was used to seeing and busted me up). I've played it 5 or 6 times in tournament and won every game with it so far except 1 game against a much higher rated opponent. I like it for the reasons mentioned in earlier posts, it's more based on setups and ideas than concrete lines. I'm not going g to get caught out in some trap on move 20 in some open pet variation in the open sicilian my opponent plays. I just get my setup and play chess.
Thanks for the games posted pfren, I'll review them later and learn what I may. Wouldn't be the first carlsen idea I've stolen against sicilians. Lol
... Did these games made IM Shahade angry?
I don't know. Did it make Karpov mad when he played his 1980 1 e4 a6 game against Miles? Didn't he go on to write How to Learn from your Defeats?
And a high level massacre. ...
Does Carlsen seem to have held hopes of more such massacres? Some games with the move of Magnus Carlsen after 1 e4 c5:
2015 against Yifan Hou: 2. Nf3
2015 against Ivan Saric: 2.Nf3
2015 against Arkadij Naiditsch: 2. Nf3
2015 against Wesley So: 2. Nf3
2015 against Alexander Grischuk: 2.Nf3
2015 against Vladimir Akopian: 2. Nf3
2015 against Maxime Vachier-Lagrave: 2. Nf3
Greg Shahade 's opinion on anything chess related is irrelevant due to his time control idiocy. If top players don't play it, it means it's bad?? Top players only play 1.e5 vs e4, therefore all other moves are bad??
Again, I do not see "bad", in the IM Greg Shahade quotes.
"The Closed Sicilian is not an especially good opening, which is pretty much the case for most openings that almost no top players play on a regular basis TODAY. What people did 50 years ago is irrelevant. That's not to say that someone like Short, or Adams won't trot it out for a single game here and there, but almost no one uses it as their exclusive answer to the Sicilian, which generally means it's not very good.
If top players aren't playing it, it's usually not good. Sometimes there will be exceptions, but they are rare and you'd need good evidence to back it up. Honestly if I know someone is playing the Closed Sicilian, I can pick one of probably 5-6 lines, each of which I can learn in probably 15 minutes, and expect to get a fully playable position without much difficulty." - IM Greg Shahade (2012)
"I am unwilling to teach someone how to play something like the Grand Prix attack, the Closed Sicilian, the Schleimann Defense. These are all ok openings as a surprise from time to time, but if you play them 100% of the time, you are severely hampering your chess development." - IM Greg Shahade (2012)
"If you really want to be great at chess someday, or want to be above 2000-2200, you will greatly help yourself by playing main lines and serious openings. If you don't have these ambitions, you can basically play whatever you want as long as you know something about it." - IM Greg Shahade (2012)
... Spassky used [7. Nh3] in several of his games at similar positions, and also this exact one. ...
Would it be a good idea to check out post-1981 developments before using?
"In the 1990s the Closed Sicilian considerably lost its popularity for several reasons. First of all, its previous adherents, such as Smyslov, Hort, and especially Spassky, ceased to develop it, and other players failed to impress with it. Secondly, Black has found clear ways to parry White's active intentions." - GM Dorian Rogozenko (2003)
Glad I came across this thread. I've started playing the closed sicilian with good results despite not being particularly knowledgeable on the difference between variations (the importance of this was pointed out to me by an opponent who played a different setup than I was used to seeing and busted me up). I've played it 5 or 6 times in tournament and won every game with it so far except 1 game against a much higher rated opponent. I like it for the reasons mentioned in earlier posts, it's more based on setups and ideas than concrete lines. I'm not going g to get caught out in some trap on move 20 in some open pet variation in the open sicilian my opponent plays. I just get my setup and play chess.
Happy to post these things!
ltristam wrote:
Taulmaril wrote:
Glad I came across this thread. I've started playing the closed sicilian with good results despite not being particularly knowledgeable on the difference between variations (the importance of this was pointed out to me by an opponent who played a different setup than I was used to seeing and busted me up). I've played it 5 or 6 times in tournament and won every game with it so far except 1 game against a much higher rated opponent. I like it for the reasons mentioned in earlier posts, it's more based on setups and ideas than concrete lines. I'm not going g to get caught out in some trap on move 20 in some open pet variation in the open sicilian my opponent plays. I just get my setup and play chess.
Happy to post these things!
To clarify I'd already picked up the closed sicilian before finding this thread but I'm still new to it and working out the nuances and this discussion thread should help.
Greg Shahade forgets that what players play has to do with fashion.For example Italian was not in fashion for many years.Suddenly top players play it again. ...
Does jengaias imagine that GM Dorian Rogozenko also "forgets"?
"In the 1990s the Closed Sicilian considerably lost its popularity for several reasons. First of all, its previous adherents, such as Smyslov, Hort, and especially Spassky, ceased to develop it, and other players failed to impress with it. Secondly, Black has found clear ways to parry White's active intentions." - GM Dorian Rogozenko (2003)
... For many decades Berlin was not a popular line.For Shahade's logic it was a bad line hampering player's development. ...
Again, where is "bad" in the IM Greg Shahade 2012 quotes? Here is a reminder of part of one of them: "... If top players aren't playing it, it's usually not good. Sometimes there will be exceptions, but they are rare and you'd need good evidence to back it up. ...". As for "Shahade's logic" in connection with the Closed Sicilian specifically, it might be as well to remember this part of what he wrote in 2012: "... Honestly if I know someone is playing the Closed Sicilian, I can pick one of probably 5-6 lines, each of which I can learn in probably 15 minutes, and expect to get a fully playable position without much difficulty."
Maybe Spassky's best closed was his wins against Geller in 68 match. Good examples of how to attack kside. Other related is Fischer's take up of Nc3 as a Sicilian response. Again some good games.
"In the 1990s the Closed Sicilian considerably lost its popularity for several reasons. First of all, its previous adherents, such as Smyslov, Hort, and especially Spassky, ceased to develop it, and other players failed to impress with it. Secondly, Black has found clear ways to parry White's active intentions." - GM Dorian Rogozenko (2003)