Bongcloud, yes that makes sense to me. Name explains your silly comment. Advice was good. Sudt to improve. That so hard to understand?
Solution to Avoid Lots of Sicilian Theory
Sort:
Dec 26, 2014
0
#83
Chicken_Monster wrote:
SicilianTheDragon wrote:
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.
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.
I think that from your statement, the Grand Prix Attack would work best for you at this moment in time. The theory involved behind it is much less than the Najdorf/Dragon or the Rossolimo/Moscow, which should make it somewhat of an easier study. Additionally, if players playing black don't really know what they're doing, this opening is good at punishing that, making it very deadly at the 1400-1800 range. This could possibly give you the variety of positions you want, (tactical to positional) depending on whether your opponent knows what she or he is doing. 
While this opening does have its drawbacks (i.e. a bit of a "one-trick pony") at the higher levels, it is by no means unplayable as you move up in ELO. I have an NM friend that still uses it as their "main" against the Sicilian. It is definitely viable long-term if you like it a lot.
Since I don't play this opening myself, I cannot recommend a specific player that you could follow. There are many high level games that can be found on programs such as ChessBase, or websites such as chessgames.com though.
Hope this helps, and good luck in your future opening endeavors!
Quick EDIT: After looking over some things, the Alapin might also be suited for you if you don't like the Grand Prix. It won't give you crazy games usually (its more positionally based), but there's not a lot to memorize, and is a solid variation against the Sicilian
EDIT #2: Sorry for dumping more information on you, but I just realized that transposing into the King's Indian Attack with 2.d3 against the Sicilian is also viable, with similar advantages to the other two (i.e. less theory, can really hurt opponents if they don't know what they're doing, variety of positions). The positions it reaches are more closed than the open main lines, so keep that in mind. Fischer is a great role model in this variation if you choose to go this route.
Your response to TJBCHESS when he stated when you weren't strong enough to be a CM (you could have calmly explained the rating requirement for USCF CM that you HAVE reached, which differs from the FIDE CM rating requirement, so you are right on that part), your response just recently to Bongcloud (which he is somewhat right about with regards to suggestions), and your overall rudeness towards others in your responses (which TheChessAnalyst isn't helping with). The incident in the past plays nothing with this. Main issue I'm having with this is your rudeness as a response, but let's put it aside, because at this point it's starting to be the focus of this thread.
As for SicilianTheDragon's suggestion, assuming he means Grand Prix with 2.Nc3 and 3.f4. I once knew someone play 2.f4 regularly and with decent success even against the Tal Gambit, but the delayed version is much better.
Dec 26, 2014
0
#86
Drybasin, this guy TBJ reported me to staff without ever talking to me. He was rude not I. No Bong made the same sugestion to Chicken and my advice was good. You study to improve. I was not rude. I was talking to Chicken and then was attacked by people who can not mind their own business. What are you guys all frieends? Chess Analyst also attacked me first. I started no conversation wiyh any of you. I was talking to my friend. Was not my idea to make the thread about me.
chess2Knights wrote:
Drybasin, this guy TBJ reported me to staff without ever talking to me. He was rude not I. No Bong made the same sugestion to Chicken and my advice was good. You study to improve. I was not rude. I was talking to Chicken and then was attacked by people who can not mind their own business. What are you guys all frieends? Chess Analyst also attacked me first. I started no conversation wiyh any of you. I was talking to my friend. Was not my idea to make the thread about me.
I never said TBJ was right for doing that, but your reaction was over the top when a simple explaination would have resulted. Let's end the conversation here.
The Grand Prix depends on the players for both sides, so some might be better at playing against it than others. I completely hated playing against it and several other Anti-Sicilians, leading me to switch to the Modern and eventually the French, while bongcloudftw has obviously had better luck against it.
I apologize for inserting something about the silly game called "CHESS" into my thread, but I just wanted to thank the National Master (and all others) for his advice. Thanks very much for the input. I'll explore those options.
wow
SicilianTheDragon wrote:
Chicken_Monster wrote:
SicilianTheDragon wrote:
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.
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.
I think that from your statement, the Grand Prix Attack would work best for you at this moment in time. The theory involved behind it is much less than the Najdorf/Dragon or the Rossolimo/Moscow, which should make it somewhat of an easier study. Additionally, if players playing black don't really know what they're doing, this opening is good at punishing that, making it very deadly at the 1400-1800 range. This could possibly give you the variety of positions you want, (tactical to positional) depending on whether your opponent knows what he or she is doing.
While this opening does have its drawbacks (i.e. a bit of a "one-trick pony") at the higher levels, it is by no means unplayable as you move up in ELO. I have an NM friend that still uses it as their "main" against the Sicilian. It is definitely viable long-term if you like it a lot.
Since I don't play this opening myself, I cannot recommend a specific player that you could follow. There are many high level games that can be found on programs such as ChessBase, or websites such as chessgames.com though.
Hope this helps, and good luck in your future opening endeavors!
Quick EDIT: After looking over some things, the Alapin might also be suited for you if you don't like the Grand Prix. It won't give you crazy games usually (its more positionally based), but there's not a lot to memorize, and is a solid variation against the Sicilian
EDIT #2: Sorry for dumping more information on you, but I just realized that transposing into the King's Indian Attack with 2.d3 against the Sicilian is also viable, with similar advantages to the other two (i.e. less theory, can really hurt opponents if they don't know what they're doing, variety of positions). The positions it reaches are more closed than the open main lines, so keep that in mind. Fischer is a great role model in this variation if you choose to go this route.
Didn't Spassky play 2.Nc3 and 3.f4 against the Sicilian sometimes?
Harisha837 wrote:
Qh5 beats c4
To what post are you referring?
Harisha837 wrote:
Correct, I meant Qh5 beats C5 not C4. It gives white a big advantage.
-----------
How do you figure?
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/1e4c5-2qh5
What's good enough for Spassky, one would think, would be good enough for anyone reading this.
@XP: Do you remember the time controls on that game with 2.Qh5? Seems like a blitz thing.
Someone should rank (well, they probably have somewhere) the different anti-Sicilians by (1) effectiveness against your average club playing opponent with no information about them, (2) learning "burden" (i.e., how much time must an average club player must invest in order to be competent), (3) at what ranking does its effectiveness diminish (e.g., after 2200+ it drops from an 8 to a 5 or whatever), (4) etc.
For example, SicilianTheDragon said multiple times that the GPA was good to a pretty high level but was a "one-trick pony." So....should one waste one's time?
I'm GUESSING there are more variations to learn (or a higher "learning burdern") with the GPA than with the closed Sicilian, but that the "effictiveness" is greater. I could be way off though.
Hold the phone here, there are people above 2000 who wouldn't let the c-pawn go for the e-pawn?!
2...Nf6! 3.Qxc5,Nxe4 looks correct to me but obviously Nakamura worked all the complications out during his home prep willing to take a slight disadvantage as white. Still, Nakamura very likely looked at 2...d6 for good measure too so black's attempt to sidestep preperation wasn't a good idea.
Edit: he went for Qh4 in the games below rather than taking the pawn. Looks even worse to me since black plays ...Nc6 clamping down on the d4 square, when a d4 thrust doesn't even have queen support anymore and black's ahead in development.
Dec 29, 2014
0
#98
The white side of Sicilian are fun!
Play for a English attack whenever possible!
Dec 29, 2014
0
#99
Agreed, linlaoda! If you learn only the English Attack of the Open Sicilians, you'll have about as much "theory" as any non-standard Sicilian. So, the question again is, why bother with non-standard lines if the main lines are easy to learn and give white an edge?
Please refrain from such comments before someone reports you to my good friend Erik. Get the point.
Translation: "Stop picking on me or I'm gonna tell Mommie"
Really, is that profile pic of your dad, because you act like you are 8.