Sicilian v. Caro-Kann (Ultimate 1. e4 challenge)

both of our games our out of theory pretty fast here is the first game

second game

we usually play h4 or b4 in the a3 siccilian i opted out of both in this game

I’m sorry that this happend we’ll give it a few days and if nothing happens I can always find a sub

At the moment team Sicilian has won 2 games but, we still have a while till we will have a winner out of the 2 teams

i accidentally played e5 in one of those games

I got clobberd by MRindia, bit of a rating mismatch though lol

You at least tried your best

@KMWS - You didn't play all that badly, in my opinion.  The Sicilian game was sharp (as it usually is), which favors a Sicilian player, and Sicilian players are aggressive, which generally makes them dangerous against the Caro-Kann (which is slow from a tempo standpoint, but otherwise solid).

It takes an extremely strong player to make the Caro-Kann's solidity compensate adequately for its loss of tempo, particularly against players who press the attack.  Of course, it can be very hard to reach that level using the Caro-Kann as your primary defense, simply because the Caro-Kann defers the tactical and positional questions which will eventually arise with respect to the center whenever white plays 1. e4 (many C-K players are 1. d4 players with white, which compounds this issue).

Not saying the C-K isn't playable, mind you, just that it's harder to improve while using it.  The Sicilian and the French teach players to play with greater precision, which all but forces the players who use it to get better (or else give up the opening).  Many lines and principles of the French Defense in particular are also very useful when playing the Caro-Kann - Tigran Petrosian's games (he used both the French and the Caro-Kann regularly) illustrate this vividly.

In any case, thanks for playing!

But that does not mean the caro is straight up boring it's how u see an opening if u look it tactically it can have many tactics too

That is correct.  The Caro-Kann can lead to some very interesting tactical sequences, and has very important long-term positional issues for black to sort out.  Simply by giving up tempo, black gives white an extra move to possibly overextend the pawn center.  But here, again, the proper means of countering white's efforts in the center are best learned in the French Defense, where black not only can strike back, but must do so immediately.

A lot of C-K players, particularly at the amateur level, use the C-K because it's impossible to lose quickly with it.  Top-level C-K games look radically different than amateur level C-K games, to a far greater extent than is true for other openings.  A C-K player can dodge the question without immediately losing the game, which is why the question so often goes unanswered.

Exactly although my reason of playing ck is a little different I like tactical attacking positions but I play ck cause if I don't play a solid opening I might do some silly sacrifice and lose or win the game on move 20 but these days ihave been practicing sacrifices more and ig the caro helps a lot with not losing 

These aren't the most accurate generalizations of the Caro-Kann ...

For one, the "loss of tempo" you speak of (I assume you're referring to when Black plays c6-c5, in some variations), isn't necessarily a detriment. Many openings "lose" a tempo at some point of the game, when a pawn or piece is moved a second time. Look at some variations of the Ruy Lopez, and see how White "loses" tempi by allowing his king bishop to be chased around by Black's queenside pawns. Or how Black "loses" tempi by having to bring his queen knight to the edge of the board, then back toward the center again, after advancing his c-pawn.

Sometimes, moving pieces or pawns several times, in the opening, is done because the needs of the position are continually changing.

Counting tempi is a useful concept for beginners to learn, but it's also something that should be disregarded, if tactical or positional considerations outweigh it.

Consider the Closed Catalan, also, where Black plays his pawn to c6, then later plays it to c5, once his queenside is more properly developed. One could argue, "Black loses a tempo by moving his c-pawn twice to reach c5, instead of playing it to c5 right away!" But that would be missing the finer points. The pawn is placed on c6 for specific reasons, and in some lines, playing it to c5 in one go would be a positional mistake.

Also, the Caro-Kann doesn't "defer" tactical and positional questions, in regards to the center. I'm not sure what you mean by that. It's quite confrontational in the center. Just like in the French, Black strikes at White's e4 pawn on move 2 . . .

I understand you're a proponent of the French and/or the Sicilian (which is completely understandable), but you're mischaracterizing the Caro-Kann along the way.

Moreover the sicillian is 3 tempos down and the French plays without a biship

Bishop

What how is Sicilian 3 tempo down?!

@BestSell - The concept of opening tempo was a difficult one for me to get a good sense of, too, until I read Nimzowitsch (My System).  What you're missing is that the ultimate real target for black in both the Caro-Kann and the French Defense is not e4, but d4.  The initial central tension against e4 can be resolved by white without particular harm, while the weakness on d4 can't be repaired, it can only be overprotected, and that is where the loss of tempo of the C-K really shows.  White can overprotect d4 far more easily in the C-K than in the French (where black usually wins if d4 falls).

The C-K is best played as a French, it doesn't even make much sense long term to mobilize the light square bishop first, it's simply traded off with further loss of tempo.  In the French, yes, the light square bishop is initially blocked in, but it can be liberated by force using the pressure black applies against d4 to gain tempo.

Again, I'm not saying the C-K is bad, just slow.  A further advance to c5 is necessary for black, and the "compensation" for this loss of tempo (the supposed mobility of the light square bishop) is illusory.  The reason 1. ..c6 is more solid is mainly that it takes the b5 square out of play - a square which is a common attacking square for white in other openings.

An opening that doesn't force immediate decisions and careful positional play is simply not good for an amateur looking to make the next step up, in my opinion.  Practicing with the French Defense will make most players better with the Caro-Kann.

Take a look at Petrosian's Caro-Kann Defense, as well as his French Defense.  Petrosian was essentially a super-Nimzowitsch (that is, he applied Nimzowitsch's principles more rigorously and effectively than Nimzowitsch himself), and the only system player to ever win the World Championship.  I think you will see what I mean.

Want to make one quick point about overprotection, as well.  The point of overprotection is not defensive, it is offensive.  If a key point has 2 attackers and 2 defenders, both defenders are effectively immobilized.  However, if that same point has 2 attackers and 3 defenders, then all of the defenders are mobile and can switch from defense to attack at any time.

If you have an opening which makes d4 weak (which both the French and Caro-Kann usually do), the time needed to apply pressure to that weakness is critical to determining how much white must sacrifice piece mobility for the sake of its defense.  White gets an extra move to develop defenders for d4 in the Caro-Kann, possibly more, since 1. ..c6 not only doesn't pressure d5, but also takes the c6 square away from the b8 knight until c5 is played.

So a 1500 is arguing with a 2400 on an opening that requires a lot of knowledge