Solution to Avoid Lots of Sicilian Theory

Doncha love it when someone acts as if they don't understand what someone else said, but then says they knew all along what they were talking about?

Never saw why people make such a big deal of the open sicilian. Against najdorf, dragon, classical one can play 6.Be2 lines or lines with g3, Bg2. Usually you'll get either a hedgehog or positions that revolve around the d5 square, and although there is theory you can get by at lower levels just by looking at some games and typical plans. You'll also need a line against Kan/Taimanov which can be annoying due to move order, but you can still play g3 systems or find a line you like.

That really is the crux of the matter. In order to avoid theory in the Sicilian, our hero will have to spend quite a bit of time learning another system. That time could just as easily be spent learning the main lines, so I don't see any advantage to learning the offbeat systems in the first place. 

If your opponents have similar ratings to you and know the openings better, you can be pretty confident that they aren't as good at other phases of the game. So I go back to what I said earlier: it doesn't really matter which system you choose unless your goal is to be really good. You'll have to invest the time and energy to learn it well enough to play against your competition no matter which one you choose. 

There aren't many good short cuts to becoming a better chess player. You really do have to put in the work.

To answer the OP, learn main lines. It's good for you.

Chicken, what was your goal again? Was it to learn the rules and how the pcs move?

I am sure it has been said somewhere in these 4 pages, but - 1.d4 seems the most obvious.

          In my opinion, it really depends on what your long term goals are for chess Chicken_Monster. For the Sicilian specifically, what type of variation are you looking for against it? Are you looking for a short term "stopgap" that can be used temporarily, or something that can be played consistently at the higher levels as you progress? The main lines of the Sicilian (Najdorf, Dragon) are definitely very heavy theoretically, so I can definitely understand why you want to avoid those 

         Additionally, it depends on what type of player you are. Do you like more aggressive and crazy positions, or more quiet like ones? Since you are from a 1.d4 background, I assume this is the latter option (I could be completely wrong however!).

         I personally play the Rossolimo/Moscow Variation line against the Sicilian (2.Nf3 followed by 3.Bb5). I like to play this because it allows for chances to outplay the opponent positionally while holding some "venom" for the unwary Sicilian player. However, this line has definitely gotten more popular, so theory is a definitely heavy (although less than the more popular Dragon and Najdorf). Its a great choice for the long term as alternative option to the standard 3.d4 main line Sicilian. 

         At your current ELO level, the Grand Prix Attack for the Sicilian (2.Nc3 followed by 3.f4) is very effective against similarly rated players, especially if they don't know what they're doing. Admittedly, its a bit of a "one-trick pony", which is why its not seen to much at the higher levels (2000+). However, you can still outplay your opponent even if they counter it perfectly. 

        The Alapin (2.c3) is also another interesting option you can take a look at, as its more positionally centered when compared to the main lines. While you won't get anything huge out of the opening, you won't be at risk of losing right out of the opening either. As white you'll most likely will get a slight advantage out of the opening, and can outplay your opponent from there.

Best of luck.

Do I have to eat my vegetables too, Daddy? j/k

To RULE the Universe.

I'm actually well into a turn-based game as we type. I am experimenting with the White side of 1.e4 c5 2.b3 right now. I first looked at some of Spassky's games where he plays this line. I'll probably try the deferred wing gambit that ThrillerFan mentioned next.

I started out messing around as a kid opening with 1.e4, but never did any formal study. I would just mess around with friends and knew little to nothing except how the pieces moved.

Several months ago I started taking up chess semi-seriously, in an auto-didactic fashion. First with 1.e4...and recently I started opening with 1.d4 and experimenting with various Indian and Slav defenses a little. I am still practicing with 1.e4 because I have been told it will help me improve in the long run, but more than half of my games I open with 1.d4 now.

Now if I say I want a shortcut, we all know a troll will pounce on that (it has already happened in this thread). If I say I want serious theory, a lecture will ensue that I am not ready for opening theory (that happens all the time). You can't win, but why should you care what other people think?

My goal is to improve to a very high level (I don't know how high) in the long run, as long as I am enjoying myself. Insofar as this issue is concerned, I would like to learn:

(1) a quick and dirty system(s) a can implement immediately;

(2) a long-term strategy or strategies whereby I ensconse myself within overwhelming theory; and

(3) a middle-of the road approach(es) so that I may play in tournaments at a competitive level before I am an expert in Najdorf and all variations Sicilian.

I want to be able to play consistently at higher levels, eventually. I am good at book-learning, understanding analytical concepts and reasoning, in addition to brute-force memorizing.

I prefer variety so as not to lose interest...from epic strategic and positional battles to crazy gambits and sharp tactics that erupt in a brief violent fury of bloodshed. I don't want to be able to be predictible. I want my opponent to wonder if I will play a quiet game, an aggresive game, and know that I can open with anything.

That's my long-term goal.

Thanks.

TJBCHESS, Next time get the facts before opening your mouth. I am a CM and have a USCF CERT to prove it!!! Second Just because the books are not online does not mean they do not exist. You should have talked to me first. I just complained to Erik about you and your pure nonsense.

What are the advantages? 1.Nf3 and then what is intended next? Does it obviate the Sicilian Defense?

The 1.Nf3 thought had crossed mind. I read there is a nice series called Wojo's Weapons utilizing 1.Nf3 exclusively (I think). Three or four volumes for White openings with 1.Nf3. Supposed to be good.

I don't know the pros and cons of opening with 1.Nf3 versus 1.e4 versus 1.d4, but perhaps you or someone reading this can shed some light.

Yes, you are a USCF CM.  You've said that multiple times already.  Being rude about everything makes people shy away from you and what you say, however.

Just heard my 7 year old have the same argument:

Neighbor Kid: "I am a Astronaut, I really am an astronaut!"

My Kid: "Then show me your spaceship."

Neighbor Kid: "Just because my spaceship is not in the driveway doesn't mean I don't have one."

My Kid: "Your a Twat" (I will have a talk about that one with him)

Neighbor Kid: "I'm taking my toy's and going home." 

Chess2Knights do you get out much?

Chess Analyst. No idea what your silly post means. But offensive lauguage such as your child uses is not allowed on chess.com. It is a violation of site rules. Please refrain from such comments before someone reports you to my good friend Erik. Get the point.

DRYBASIN, Rude about what? Me and Chicken are friends and joke around all the time. So another person who needs to talk to me first before assuning stuff.

Complaining about the opinions of others when they contradict you slightly, and from experience boasting about your credentials doesn't exactly endear others to what you are saying.  Wasn't referring to how you and Chicken interact with each other.

+1

Drybasin, What others, be specific. Names please. You mean the guy who reported me with no facts. Otherwise what on Eaarth are you talking about. My only intreaction was with Chicken until attacked. Learn to read.