gothamchess plays openings with the sole purpose to throw people off and confuse them, and thats what he relys on heavily. thats what he wont get better than 2300 (other than him allways trying to trade everything and draw with higher rated players, now you know where people here get it from.)
Switching to Sicilian, but which Sicilian?
Sort:
May 1, 2023
0
#183
GYG wrote:
SamuelAjedrez95 wrote:
@GYG
Against Closed Sicilian/GPA black just plays a dragon setup and is practically equal out the opening.
Practically equal out of the opening, but getting mated before move 20, because white has played the same kingside attacks 1000 times before.
There's no need to guess or suspect about things like this, because we have the lichess amateur database. The sicilian is much more dangerous for unprepared players AND requires much more preparation than the other defences. That's just a fact.
Did you actually check before posting this? Because I did, and it's simply not true. Club-level players score great with the Sicilian. Here's the Lichess database, filtered for the 1000-1800 range (I didn't cherry-pick that -- I started with that as my guess for the sorts of levels we're talking about).
As the line at the bottom shows, Black has a *winning* record against the Sicilan. There's only one line -- the Alapin -- that gives White a statistically significant edge. And as soon as Black learns to play either Nf6 or d5 instead of their usual second move, Black starts getting a nice edge there too.
Why tell people this and pretend it's scientifically-based without actually checking it?
tlay80 wrote:
Club-level players score great with the Sicilian.
I never said otherwise.
What I did say was this:
GYG wrote:
The sicilian is much more dangerous for unprepared players AND requires much more preparation than the other defences.
@tlay80
That's what I'm saying. He said black is normally getting mated before move 20 in the GPA and if you follow the d6 line, black is winning most of the games.
This is what people say, "aw damn Sicilian is too theoretical for beginners and you're just gonna lose all the time" based on what? What's your source of information? Because my games don't tell that story. The database doesn't tell that story. They just pull this bs out their a # #.
A lot of people played bs anti-Sicilians that I wasn't prepared for against me and I still beat them without knowing anything.
samuel i looked at your games and you are way better than a 1300, why are you so low down
SamuelAjedrez95 wrote:
A lot of people played bs anti-Sicilians that I wasn't prepared for against me and I still beat them without knowing anything.
Anything can happen at the braindead 3-digit beginner rating level. I am talking averages, not one person's individual experiences.
For the sake of some of the slower posters who seem to enjoy putting words in eachother's mouths I will re-iterate my inital take on this:
GYG wrote:
The way I see it, a sub-2000 player who plays the Najdorf will be reaching rich positions which will teach him alot about chess in the long run, but at the same time he will have to content himself with losing game after game against his peers where it felt like he had absolutely no hope. Because time and time again he will be facing opponents on their home turf, who are playing a pet line that they specialise in.
sure you might blunder every so often, but you are a good, attacking player whos atleast also a critical thinker
@mrOpenRuy
Yeah I know about the weird Gotham lines. And guess what his plan after a3 is?
Bc4!!! DELAYED BOWDLER ATTACK MFS LET'S GO!!!
@GYG
Are you calling me braindead? What did I do? Lol
Also I'm not just talking individual experiences. I'm also talking averages based on the database like I said.
@mrOpenRuy
Because I don't play enough and I'm bad with time pressure.
May 1, 2023
0
#195
I don’t know about your guys but my training routine is concise and it does not include opening studies or theory to get by at the 1500-2000 bracket.
samuel i see that you play the ruy lopez, what do you recommend agianst this line:
Ok, I'm done arguing with people less than half my rating, but I'll leave with this video from Aussie GM David Smerdon. In the first few minutes he talks about the pros and cons of playing the Sicilian Dragon, but the same can be applied to the Najdorf. This perfectly captures the way I feel about this topic.
ie, at around 5:50 he says "you're going to have to be a very broad player to play the sicilian dragon, because you're going to have to play specialists on their own turf".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2QMY_J4nzM
May 1, 2023
0
#198
GYG wrote:
tlay80 wrote:
Club-level players score great with the Sicilian.
I never said otherwise.
What I did say was this:
GYG wrote:
The sicilian is much more dangerous for unprepared players AND requires much more preparation than the other defences.
Wait, you acknowledge that, statistically, black does fine and yet still want to say the Sicilian is a dangerous choice? And what was your point in invoking the Lichess database if it doesn't actually support your point? I was giving you the doubt that you were just misinformed on the statistics, which I can kind of understand, since a lot of people do throw around this notion that the Sicilian is too dangerous for amateurs. But this explanation is just tortured. You seem to really want to find a way to be right, when it isn't there.
I will concede that there is a certain disappiontment for intermediate players who take up the Sicilian after being fascinated by its richest games, and spend a lot of time pouring over the intricacies of the Poisoned Pawn Najdorf or trying to understand when to sac the exchange in the Dragon, only to discover they're spending half their time facing things like 2. Bc4. They score fine against these sidelines, but, while playing them, it's easy to wish one were playing a real opening. But then again, the White players who do this against the Sicilian tend to play similarly second-rate setups against everything else too.
@mrOpenRuy
a4 or c3 I think. Nxe4 isn't a threat.
GYG wrote:
Ok, I'm done arguing with people less than half my rating, but I'll leave with this video from Aussie GM David Smerdon. In the first few minutes he talks about the pros and cons of playing the Sicilian Dragon, but the same can be applied to the Najdorf. This perfectly captures the way I feel about this topic.
ie, at around 5:50 he says "you're going to have to be a very broad player to play the sicilian dragon, because you're going to have to play specialists on their own turf".
He's going to say that because he's only seeing it from the perspective of a GM so he's assuming the opponents will be on the level of GMs. It doesn't consider the amateur level and that amateurs, such as ourselves, will be playing against other amateurs at our own level. It's unlikely that they will have extensive GM knowledge of the opening.
In the words of IM Andras Toth "You can't play the Sicilian because of the 1300 with their extensive knowledge of Najdorf theory? Unlikely."
i dont know what it is OTB, but thats what it is on chess.com