Switching to Sicilian, but which Sicilian?

@llampozhil25

I never said anyone must play the Sicilian. I was encouraging playing the Najdorf and explaining the benefits because that was the topic of the thread.

I acknowledge that there are other rich openings in chess other than the Sicilian.

I was criticising those who were going out of their way to discourage it on a thread which has nothing to do with whether someone should or shouldn't play the Sicilian. It's just annoying how every thread about the Sicilian turns into this discussion when it wasn't even asked. People just go out of their way to tell people that they aren't good enough to play it or they shouldn't bother.

Someone asked what Sicilian is a good opening to play, and all the gatekeepers came out saying none of them. That's how we got here. Let me give a different argument for learning the Sicilian: You must learn to play the Sicilian with White anyway, because c5 is a very common response to e4. Once you know how to play the Sicilian with White, why not try it with Black as well?

My gripe with the gatekeepers is that they specifically tell beginners to avoid the Sicilian. Yet, for beginner-intermediate players there are no bad openings. At that level, both Black and White will make some minor mistakes, and sound positioning and accurate moves are more important than memorizing opening variants and their traps.

@mrOpenRuy

Bg5. This is very sharp and aggressive. It essentially prevents black from playing e5 as Bxf6 would weaken d5 too much. This in turn prepares f4-e5.

Bc4 is also a great line. It's very sharp and aggressive but a little more dubious than Bg5. It provokes e6, as e5 would give white strong control over the lightsquares. White often sacrifices the bishop on e6 when the tactical opportunities present themselves.

I completely agree with this method of learning chess. It's how I went from 1050 to 1650 in less than a year. I'd play a game in some stupid variation, lose, and book myself against it or put it into the "just develop and play an equal middlegame" category and know what to do next time.

so, i should play bg5 if im ready to play 30 moves of theory + kindside attack and Bc4 as a dangerous sideline that if my oppoment does not know its a free win?

also why is Bc4 a bit more dubious?

Yeah, me neither. @GYG makes a good point, and then it gets completely blown out of context.

I’m not saying the Sicilian doesn’t make sense,

im saying it makes tons of sense!

Fischer-Sozin attack is a free win? Since when?

Bc4 Najdorf is great! The main idea is to put the bishop on the diagonal, black is obliged to play e6 or the bishop would be an absolute monster, and white will play f4, f5, with a massive swing on the black kingside! Namely the e6 pawn!

OH I READ IT WRONG lol sorry i wrote that when i woke up

I guess the main reason why it’s considered inferior to Bg5 or be3 is because e6 blunts the bishop, but Bobby Fischer has shown that the f4-f5 plan is in fact very deadly! It works very well on the club level and leads to really exciting games! Second most fun way to play against the Najdorf imo behind the English attack!

No problemo! 🐸

"But this may be a rating thing... low rated players may not have to think / worry about such things yet... maybe for them getting an equal position on move 10 is enough, I don't really know."

This is a very accurate statement, but perhaps even giving too much credit to some lower rated players. People play openings like the London or the Exchange French or a dozen other equal but uninspiring openings because they are perfectly happy getting an equal position on move THREE.

I have played more than 10 moves of theory a grand total of less than ten times, as long as we aren't counting traps with a forced M6 sequence, because nobody in this whole ratings bracket (1600-1800) plays theory.

The KID players are out of book after 5... 0-0 or 6... Nbd2 despite not even getting into any real lines yet. The Closed Morphy players are out of book by 7... 0-0. The Najdorf players are out of book by 6... e6. The Botvinnik Semi-Slav players are out of book by 7... h6. And these are the players I'd call prepared. In approximately a third to a half of my games, I face Philidors, Owenses, Czech/Small Center Pircs, Old Steinitzes, Botvinnik-Carlses, et cetera, and these players are often out of book by move 4.

sub 1000s just need to develop their pieces, control the center and castle!

Is this not the heart of the disagreement at hand? Better prep beats worse prep, with the higher rated players standing as a bloc to say that you'll need a lot of better prep to win or you'll get slaughtered and one or two Sicilian players standing in defense by saying that better prep beats worse prep, but it isn't as bad as all the higher-rateds are making it seem?

Bc4 i perfer because in the Be3 or Bg5 lines, its theory packed and you are just playing a book untill move 25

bc4 is less common, more deadly, and brings out the most ¨brilliant potential¨ out of somebody

Exactly. There's hardly a more dynamic opening in all of chess than a good Winawer, but I can see why he's switching. The amount of 3. Nc3 players currently in the U1800 pool is negligible.

Fischer Sozin is awesome 👏

Fischer sozin has a lot of venom!

In the Najdorf as well one could play a restriction line , e.g. a Be2 line or a g3 line. They can also play an Alapin or a Bb5+ or a closed sicilian, you can't force a sharp type of game.

The OP has already done a time investment in the French and spent two years playing and analysing games in French structures, so in a comparative basis it makes more sense to continue playing it adopt some more dynamic lines, unless he's bored playing it.