top 5 responses to the Sicilian ranked

Nothing wrong or shameful about taking a draw with the black pieces if your opponent hands it to you or you fought for it.

You’re just making it harder on yourself when there is no need to.

Anyways, I offered ideas and even help should OP continue with Najdorf.

I even showcase my games against stronger opponents to demonstrate how easy it was if you got away from the Najdorf.

The choices are there.

Sam, I’m not talking down on you guys, I am talking from personal experience.

It's a good thing if you run into anti-Sicilians because learning to adapt to these variations is valuable experience.

Also the thing about the d6 weakness is just part of a broader theme in chess. A lot of openings in chess accept some weakness in exchange for some strength and counterplay. That's a defining trait of the game and part of what makes it interesting and fun to play.

Rhetorical statement. I'm also talking from experience that I had good games in the Najdorf. I have lost some but I also won plenty as well, as is the nature of chess. Nothing wrong with it at all.

My 2000+ FIDE training partners are struggling with the Najdorf, so I cannot imagine what you guys are going thru.

Go play some 15/10 and demonstrate it. It’s not that easy as it sounds when the timer is ticking down.

I’ll try not to be bias when I analyze those games.

I think the OP never said they struggled to find middlegame plans. But even in the case they are, they can improve by learning to find middlegame plans instead of copping out and not trying to learn at all.

It's like if an adult is struggling to learn to ride a bike so you tell them to just stick to a tricycle.

Going through what? I am playing against opponents who are about my level so they have the EXACT SAME BURDEN to find the moves as I or the OP does.

Like you said, most games at this level are decided by blunders or mistakes.

"2000s struggle with an opening vs 2000s so 1300s will struggle against 1300s" by chuck 2023

there are many analogies one can make to disprove this statement

Go play a bunch of 15/10 games and we will analyze them.

Its not as easy as you say it is.

because I’ve consulted with 4 digit rated players? What’s wrong with my list, since my rating’s “only in the triple digits”? A lot of players who’ve said something about my rating didn’t actually bother to say what was wrong with my list.

Get off the road buddy:

this is true

Don’t lose sleep over it, even 2000+ FIDE players struggle with the Sicilian in general.

Start playing 15/10 to give yourself more time to think and blunder checks.

Will do, thanks for your advice

I’m gonna stick with the Najdorf tho

I don't have to follow your rules. I know what your whole point is going to be anyway. You're just going to nitpick inaccuracies and say "this is why you shouldn't play the Sicilian".

Samuel’s talk is cheap talk….. go lead by example instead of being a keyboard warrior.

Theres a big difference in translating the knowledge and performing under time constraints was my point.

I’ll skim and analyze the games.

If there’s a line you are struggling with, we can review and address them.

You just need a second set of eyes who’s gone thru it recently.

Same with you. I can play when I like to and because I enjoy it, not because you try to push me into it so you can nitpick my games and try to ridicule me. I am accepting challenges.

You just give poor anecdotal, arbitrary examples. This is just keyboard sophistry.

"Don't play the Sicilian because of this 1 game where someone made a mistake. Making mistakes is bad."

"Don't play the Sicilian because of this 1 game where it was a draw. Draws are bad."

"Don't play the Sicilian because of this 1 game where someone lost. Losing is bad."

We all know, according to Chuck, any time you make a mistake or lose a game in an opening, you should give up that opening.

All I hear from you are excuses….