what should i play vs the sicilian (now a discussion of whites side of the sicilian)

finally unmuted

i can 1v1 you in a wing gambit soon

finally unmuted by whom?

me?

i havent unmuted anyone in forever

if its by chess.com ignore this post

also 1v1 who, me?

a was muted by chess.com for a few weeks because i challenged a woke person on their thoughts, and a person said ¨i can 1v1 in a wing gambit¨

to point a)... such is how it works (btw, no one derail this thread into political stuff please keep it atleast opening related)

to point b) oh ok i get it (you are closer rating to them right)

the wing gambit is near refuted with black getting a easy, active game

rebuttals?

i dont got time rn, a can do it in half hour

dont see why not, you two are pretty close in rating with the lower rated having their pet opening

would like to see such a match

I think the smith-morra is a good choice. IT is fairly simple to learn the development scheme and tactical motifs, and can offer you some great attacking games. In addition some lines may offer some positional play revolving around d5 and d6 and the c-file giving plenty of learning chances and better understanding of the game in the long run.

Another bonus is that many of your opponents at your level will be under-prepared against the smith morra as it is not the mainline open sicilian.

the con for this opening is that it can be quite double-edged at times especially when it gets to the more tactical type positions, it can be complex at times and ive had a few games where ive gone on brilliant attacks to only blunder a single move and lose the game.

edit: open sicilian is also a great choice i would just reccomend staying clear of the slow positional play of the closed sicilian (a mistake i made early on in my chess career)

all your points except the middle paragraph apply to the open as well

so... surprise value for a pawn, which to take... hmm...

i agree, if you are going to play an anti sicilian, let it be the rossolimo or smith morra

if black does not know what hes doing in the morra, he loses. even if he does know white gets great development and a center attack at the cost of a pawn

in the rossolimo black gets good play, so does white. and the plans are simple are the game is complex but less attacking

Just because I give an opinion you dislike you start getting sensitive and accusing me of being aggressive? Come on man, that's so childish and sensitive. Spare us the crocodile tears.

I didn't say anything personal and then you start taking personal jabs saying I'm being "aggressive" and "I like chess too much". You're here debating in forums all the same, and making these types of comments, so you're not really one to talk.

You misunderstood the analogy about school. The analogy about school was comparing it to learning, not literal. So actually trying to learn something about chess, the Sicilian in this case, would be compared to "staying in school", whereas constantly complaining about how hard it is while not even trying would be compared to "dropping out".

#241 youd like to read the rest of the thread so far

it was... something

if you like your bishop on the a3 f8 diagonal/ a6-f1 diagonal maybe play the benko, at least the benko is a sound opening that actually gives you chances and isint refuted

#243.... assumes that a question "should i play sicilian wing gambit or benko gambit" makes any sense

first off, one of them is initiated by black the other by white

one is a 1. d4 opening the other is 1. e4

both are preventable

you might have one both or neither of them in a repertoire

yeah but declining the benko gives black an easy, equal game

compared to declining the a3 pawn in the wing gambit

ok... but why compare two openings like that in the context of "what to play"

theyre not mutually exclusive

Lol I skimmed through it briefly. I don't have the energy to reply to everything haha.

they provide similar queensides

im saying if you want these types of positions do it as black because as white its much harder to get and blacks is easily better

This is a good point. Whenever there is someone asking for a recommendation like this, people start making these arguments like "learn my simple opening because there's less theory" or "this is better for beginners" when that wasn't even a priority for the poster.

I would've thought when I haven't said anything like that, I want to know what's actually good in the most practical sense, not someone's personal feeling about whether this is too hard or worth learning or not. That stuff you can figure out on your own.

I've genuinely seen people make the "this is better for beginners" or "get better at chess first" argument to actually fairly high rated players like 1900.