The practical refutation of the Sicilian Defense

I  never liked the sicilian defense because is unnatural,  hypermodern  and really stupid opening for humans just let y0ur opponents kreate a big attack over the f5 square  .  The real players,  classical guys would never try the sicilian because it is not a serious try , i´ts purely a computer garbage, artificial,  engines really like prety much becasue they have not a soul .

 I really hate Sicilian , and i got a system to punish all my opponents when they employ this opening. 

OK , Be Alert,  WITH this system, y0u are gonna win all of YOur games,  Sicilian is just busted after y0u see this system ,  this is the big sysstem,  the black is just out of his repertoire. Probably you already know this system cause you are not an amateur player. 

It´s not only me wh0 discover this sytem,   Anish Giri  won his game against Nepomniatchi in the last Tata Steel Tournament with this approach but he played the ENGINE VARIATION ( Nd5 instead of the classical path  h3-g4-Ng3 which it works pretty well in the Human World better than the drawish line  Giri chose. 

Same idea against Dragon, scheveningen, Classical  , etc  

It does not work against some lines of the e6 system , when the black plays quickly Bb4, but then i reccomend you the "novelty" Qd3! with the plan of put your queen in g3 and play a3 in the next move .    it does not work either against the Pelikan ( but pelikan is easy to refute after the sideline Nd5!? instead of Bg5 )  . 

SICILIAN IS the big fraud of chess,  Why do you think  the Chinese Team  nowadays have chosen the Petroff Defense as the only truth in all of their games ?   The oriental mind is the most developed mind ever in planet earth and they can not be wrong,   was Buda wrong?  sun tzu was wrong? was wrong  Lao Tse?  no right, so they would not play the sicilian neither. 

@JohnnyKGB's main defense against 1. e4 is the Latvian Gambit.

Just saying.

Okay this is obviously trolling but it's not a bad system. However, it's just like anything else. White has ideas, black has ideas, and it's a game. Anyone over 1800 should have some preparation with black against these lines in the Sicilian that he or she plays.

It reminds me of the Adams attack with 6.h3. 

That's not an accident. The Adams Attack exists as an attempt to get this setup without having to stop the pawn on g3. 

the ADAMS ATTack is faster, but it is n0t flexible,  i used to play adams attack too, but then i realised sometimes the move g4 is n0t correct.

anyway, the most logical m0ve against sicilian is probably c3  , but too much theory and prety b0ring 0pening with the isolated pawn positi0ns.  

 If you play the OPen Sicilian then i Rekkomend y0u this systems with g3,  but sometimes as i said y0u have n0t en0ugh time t0 play g3-Bg2  .  Then y0u must be 0riginal and play Qd3 or Nb5 0r Nd5 0r wh0 knows.  

Avoid the black the0ry is the key.   I kkomented the game Giri-Nepo in WIkj aan zee,  This GUy , anish giri , has probably the best practical ideas in CHESS,  thanks to his computer.  He also plays pretty well the critical  line e5  which refutes the english opening, 1.c4   .

I prefer 6.h3.  

So did Robert James Fischer when playing white against the najdorf.

The Adams Attack.  That's a good video in how to play the Adams Attack.  IIRC, you don't always play g4, but it seemed like h3 wasn't a useful move in those lines.  I don't know, I'm a lower rated guy just looking for something offbeat that people won't be so booked up on.  There was a preview of a book called Sicilian Modernized or something like that where 6.h3 was recommended so I've been wanting to experiment with it.  Maybe this system would be a more offbeat way of getting the same position.  

Black's c8 bishop belongs on g4 ... certainly not on b7, unless e6 has been played, rather than e5. Personally, I play e6 Sicilians. Buddha was wrong about many things. His insistence on the four noble truths, the five tested paths to righteousness and the six best ways to tie your shoelaces had little bearing on reality. He was an escapist.

Huh?  There are basically no sicilian mainlines where the c8 bishop gets developed to g4, it almost always goes to b7 or d7 with the exception of some dragon lines where it goes to e6.  

Oh? I sometimes play Bg4 or Be6 in my Sicilians. The point is that in that game with e5, black isn't going to be able to force through d6 - d5, so the B is better moved to release d7 for the N or, better still, follow up Bg4 with Q d7. I assume you realise the position under discussion isn't a main line Sicilian? However, I didn't think 6 e5 was well-motivated. Of course, the e4 pawn is immobile for the moment and so white's g2 bishop doesn't have much range but this set-up is perfect to clamp down on d5, so I much preferred a black system with e6. Actually, this shows the comparative inflexibility of black systems with an early d6. I think e6 is more flexible but, for ultimate flexibility, I usually play 2 ... a6, although 2 ... e6 is also fine.

Can you give an example against the dragon? What are the ideas there? Thank you! 

@JohnnyKGB--  I see in addition  to  posting bad chess advice in the form of chess analysis, you are also distributing sh*t sandwiches. 

Not so good against the Accelerated Dragon. 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 g6! 5.g3 Bg7 6.Ne2 ( or 6.Nb3) 6...Nf6 7.Bg2 0-0 8.Nbc3 b6! 9.0-0 Bb7 and black is fine. Its white who has to be careful not black.   There is no refutation in the Sicilian defense.  

I'm sure that is true. I don't know how many accelerated dragon players are going to even think of Bb7 though. 

This may be as JohnnyKGB suggests and a practical refutation. I just wonder how it plays out when the pawns are on e6 or g6 protecting the f5 square. 

Yeah, Sicilian is kind of refuted by

I played 6.g3 against Sicilian, is not bad but no refutation. I all you can do is play sound opening and press for advantage, Sicilian is sound defense and players like Karpov, Anand, Fischer, Carlsen and Kasparov played it for dynamic quality hoping it will lead for a win against weaker opponents.