Solution to Avoid Lots of Sicilian Theory

My advise on the Sicilian is to avoid the lines that have been studied the most by masters for hundreds of years. All of the most popular lines stay in the DB for up to 30 moves. The Najdorf is one of the worse for staying in the DB if you jump out early it can cost you the game and if you stay in until the end of DB coverage it comes out almost a draw with not much choise.

My advice which I hate to give away in a forum is to play the proven but little known Sicilian lines these days. I have found playing the Old Sicilian and the DB player always follow it till you get to move 5. .. e5 that puts you into the Pelikan with its backward pawn but it equalizes quickly and gives Black one of the best chances as most players as White have no idea how to defend against it. If there is one book line you want to learn in the Sicilian I recommend this simple line with great results. Here is the line for the SIcilian Pelikan :)

This is the line and the DB will guide White into this without any problems. 

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 

Sicilian Defense: Lasker-Pelikan Variation

Chicken will actually get crushed by me and I think he knows it. My advise was sound but he does not wish to accept the answer. Chicken if you play e4 be prepared for c5 and all the lines that follow. Do not be lazy. Study if you want to get better. If not play d4. No shortcuts in chess. That is why I am a CM and you are not.

I would go with either the Alapin or Smith-Morra. Both themes are present in all sicilian lines, I.e playing the eventual d4 with rapid development.But the Smith-Morra is the best in my opinion.

If you want to lose to well-prepared opponents rated U1800 USCF, by all means, play the Alapin or Smith-Morra. Those are among the most common choices for players under 1800, and those who play the Black side of the Sicilian should know that!

At your rating level, it doesn't really matter much which lines you finally decide to play. What matters is that you stick with your decision and study the lines thoroughly. There was an article on chesslife.com a couple years ago by Greg Shahade which discusses the best opening choices based on what your long-term goals are. 

Take a look at this interesting article!

http://www.uschess.org/content/view/11634/675

Interesting. Do you think it is playable against people rated 2000-2100+?
(I am 1900+) 

Thanks. I actually already have that article. I like it a lot.

Unfortunately, that article doesn't address my current post.

I disagree with you that it doesn't matter what lines I play, but that's my opinion. I think what I play is every bit as important as what you play, as I am building a foundation for my chess future. I could say what you play doesn't matter because you are "only" 2300 online (not that I wouldn't love to be that good) and are not on TV.

I know a 2300+ (turn-based) on this site who plays the SMG, and another very good 2000+ player who plays the Alapin.

Quoting from the article:

Your goals are to get to up to 1800:
Pick openings based on enjoyment.   You can even play strange stuff like the King’s Gambit as your main opening or the Budapest Gambit. You can play stuff that’s completely unsound because the large majority of sub 2000 players won’t be able to take advantage of your dubious opening choices. Understand that if your goals change, you may need to learn something new according to your new ambitions. If this is only a short term goal, and at some point in the future you’d like to become even stronger, you will be cheating yourself by not immediately learning more serious variations.

Your goals are to get to 2000:
Now you should be playing more solid lines and I’d avoid openings that are simply considered bad such as the Wing Gambit of the Sicilian. However you can feel free to play something like the Grand Prix Attack (even though I think it sucks).  

Your goals are to get to 2200:
Believe it or not you still have some leeway here, as quite a few players reach 2200 with complete rubbish opening repertoires. In order to increase your chances I’d recommend learning some solid openings. If you really want you can play the Alekhine’s Defense every game, or the London system for white, though I’d never recommend these to any of my students as a primary opening choice.

The minimum openings I’d recommend ... with white you can still get away with the c3 Sicilian, and 3.Nc3, 3.Nd2 or 3. e5 against the French (but no more 3.exd5 as your only choice against the French!). 

Your goals are to get to 2400 and beyond:
Now things change a lot. Let’s assume you are a player who will play only one opening against each reply by your opponent. Now the number of acceptable lines dwindles quite a bit...

With white it makes sense to play relatively main lines. There’s a reason that 90% of titled players use 2. Nf3 against the Sicilian and the large majority of them follow up with 3. d4. It’s daunting but if you want to be great at chess someday, you should probably do the hard work as early as possible, so that as you grow, you already have a base of knowledge and a rich and cultured knowledge of topical chess openings to help develop your chess understanding. If your coach insists that you play rare sidelines and you have high chess ambitions, tell them “no” and that you’d like to learn some main lines. The rare sidelines may help with short term results but in the long run it’s nice when you play the same openings the top players in the world play. It’s fun to watch Kramnik, Anand or Carlsen play your opening and learn many valuable lessons from how they handle it. Who knows, if you are researching and consistently playing the most viable theoretical lines, they may be looking at your games one day too. 

http://www.uschess.org/content/view/11634/675

________________

In other words, what matters isn't what level you are now, but what your realistic goals are. If your goal is to be a certain rating in correspondence chess at chess.com, it doesn't matter what openings you study. If your goal is to get good at chess, and to be competitive, then your opening choices matter more. 

I agree with Greg on this.

This isn't about me. It's about you, and your goals. If your goal is to be +2400 USCF, then you have only one basic choice: learn the critical lines. If your goal is something else, you have more freedom.

I am CM. They are my initials. I shall let my pieces do the talking in the tourney and then post it for all. :-) (Unless I lose.)

Back to the topic at hand.

Summarizing what we have so far (not counting the advice of the esteemed Expert c2k, which is expect everything and know everything -- well, he has been playing chess for longer than I have been alive. In time.):

(1) Lots of people are saying play the Alapin...they don't like running up against it. I hear it is played at all levels. Some really good people play it.

(2) ThrillerFan, Commander_Riker, and some others appear to be giving some excellent advice. ThrillerFan thinks the Alapin is not worthwhile. He gives a specific reason for this, abve. Do people agree or disagree with his logic re not adopting the Alapin? Why or why not?

(3) I'm getting mixed opinions on the Smith-Morra Gambit. Are others using that successfully? Sacrificing a couple of pawns seems dubious to me, but I have no experience with it yet.

(4) At your level it doesn't matter what you play. I respectfully reject that but appreciate the input. It matters to me. That's my opinion. We can agree to disagree on that one. Topic for another thread.

(5) Play 2.b3 (hey, Carlsen does it in blitz as shown herein). It can work.

(6) Learn serious theory such as the Najdorf etc. I may do that, but that will take a very long time.

@SmyslovFan: I just saw your post. Yes, point taken. I agree with what Greg says in that article. I remember the article very well. As I said, I saved it. He has some other good ones, too.

To me, it makes sense to adjust your openings with your current level and your future ambitions.

Again, it's impossible to answer your question without knowing your goals in chess. 

ThrillerFan's repertoire is appealing. What I would do is see if I could bust his lines. If they stand up to close scrutiny, the sort that a player with a week to prepare his lines against you will do, then you can feel safe playing it. 

If your goal is to break +2400, you only have one realistic choice: learn the main lines. If it's just to have fun in casual games here (and almost all games played on the internet are casual), then see whether ThrillerFan's ideas are fun for you. You're the only one who a) knows what your goals really are and b) knows what's fun for you.

Added: I just want to emphasize a key point that Greg Shahade made: If your real goal is to break 2400 USCF, then you should start working on your repertoire as early as possible. This is why you need to know your goals before you decide whether to spend time learning unsound openings or rare sidelines.

I only know about the Sicillian being the c pawn.

I can't give you a rating number goal yet, but let's assume very high just to be safe (as long as I'm enjoying chess and can pick up the pieces it will be a life-long journey). I have to learn to walk before I can run though. The long-term strategy will be learn everything in chess from the Najdorf to the Gruenfeld. It may or may not every come to fruition. I'll play it by ear.

In the near-term, I will try things such as (for example) ThrillerFan's and others' suggestions.

What are your thoughts on the Alapin?

1300 goal of blitz for me

I agree with ThrillerFan and many others: the Alapin throws away White's advantage. Black has at least three good lines that give instant equality, or perhaps even better. In correspondence chess, I would prefer Black's chances over white's! There are some cool traps in the Alapin, but there's a reason that it's far more popular among players rated 1500-1800 than among players rated 2500-2800. 

This bears repeating. ThrillerFan gave you concrete analysis, and a reasonable sideline to play instead of the Alapin. Some of the others that have contributed have virtually no OTB chess experience. Trust the players who have been there and have broken 2000 USCF. 

I'll try it out. I appreciate everyone's input thus far. Good to hear different opinions from players at different skill levels. Thanks.

Your USCF profile makes no mention of a title.  Also, your OTB rating is too low to hold that particular title.  You do not have any books published under your name either.  I submitted a report to Chess.com to have your "coaching profile" checked out.

I've played 2)b3, for many years now - and am somewhat surprised at this forum showing me that extremely strong players play it! It was suggested to me long ago by a friend who thoroughly analysed it, I am about the same strength as him about ecf 125. If black has a pawn on e5, White can sometimes just leave his pawn on f4, because of the powerfull threats along the long diagonal!I often post my QN on c3 xraying the long diagonal with the b2 Bishop aswell, after the knight has left c2-c4 is then playable, how can black now attack on the 'c file'?

Potatofarmer, re-read what you just quoted.

I show that after 2.b4 cxb4 3.a3 that Black has the excellent move 3...d5! rather than taking on a3.

Then I state "By playing 1.e4 c5 2.a3 ...", meaning INSTEAD OF 2.b4, that if Black now plays 2...d5, White is under no obligation to transpose to the initial line by playing 3.b4 (3...cxb4 would then transpose to the line that is good for Black).  However, White's idea is to play 3.b4 against most responses.  For example, 1.e4 c5 2.a3 Nc6 3.b4! or 1.e4 c6 2.a3 g6 3.b4!, or 1.e4 c5, 2.a3 e6 3.b4!, etc.

csalami, check out my post on page 1 (I think it's post 20, but I could be off) where I display 3 games of mine from early 2014.  The second I don't have the ratings listed, but Black was about 2025.  The third Black is 2097, so your question about playable against 2000-2100, most certainly.

I also think it's playable against the IM level.  The author of the book that came out a year ago played it against extreme competition with great success.

Now keep in mind, that line I showed with mate in 22 isn't going to happen at the 2400 level like it might at the 1900 level, but that doesn't mean the line is bad.  You just won't win via cheap shot, and won't get games like the first one in the three sample games I posted of mine where I annihilated him in 19 moves.  Games like the 55-mover in Atlanta are more what you can expect.

EDIT:  See post 15, not post 20!