whats the best way to learn the sicilian as a 1100-1200 player?

Sort:
Avatar of SamuelAjedrez95
Chessflyfisher wrote:

I agree: Don't.

You are a bit late to the party as OP already decided that they want to learn it BEFORE making this thread.

You're in the wrong thread. Look for the thread "what opening should I play?".

Avatar of Impractical

After 1 e4 the move ... c5 occurs in the French, Ruy Lopez, Pirc, and Sicilian--it's the timing and where white places his pieces that can cause black to transpose.  For example, Kasparov used to defend the Sicilian Alapin with a French like pawn structure:

So, eventually a good Sicilian player will need to understand all these openings' basic strategies.  Practice them all.  But, of course, to play Sicilian in tournament, you'll have to know more book on the line you choose (like, say, the Najdorf).

Avatar of tstutz21
wowimplayingchess wrote:
tstutz21 wrote:
wowimplayingchess wrote:
tstutz21 wrote:
wowimplayingchess wrote:
tstutz21 wrote:
ThroughtonsHeirAlexHebert wrote:
tstutz21 wrote:
ThroughtonsHeirAlexHebert wrote:

Noob POV here : The thing I keep in mind presentl -as Gotham Chess loves to tell students - keep it simple. 

Well, I played it when I climbed up to 1100 and 1200, and I also play it as a 1300.  Whenever A player plays e4, I follow up c5 63 times (out of 63 + 35(e5) + 3(e6) + 1(c6)).  33% White wins and 63% Black (me) wins and 4% draw.


Excellent ! I'm a noob at studying openings so that's why I put the mentions in my replies. But being a geek at "studying how to study" and learning/schematizing concepts, I really enjoy these kins of discussion and pass on quotes and examples. Here it was how I recently had info on that position. But your example is one I'll keep in my. Your line will be one I try, honestly. Thanks for conversing.

Well, I liked the french ( e4 c5 Nf3 (also 2. Nc6 works, because 2.... e6)  e6.  Threatens d5 and you can try your plan to launch d5.

My database

https://www.chess.com/explorer?moveList=e4+c5&ply=2&gameSource=other&gameType=all&color=black&username=tstutz21

Interesting because I have never tried the french and I am not rly keen on it. I have been using sicilian a bit recently and have been fairing pretty well. When I saw the title had 1100-1200 it kinda hit me close, because the sicilian was never quite difficult to study. I had much more trouble trying to optimize the italian and english. Was defintely confusing when most replies said you dont want to play sicilian at 1100-1200 and many described it to be hard.

Heres some of my other games with sicilian:

Resigned after i was rook and some pawns up ^

He resigned before the mate but even if he saw the mate and stopped it, black (me) was still in a strong position. Most games went like this. Dont have much sicilian on this account but in general I play it often.

 

Well, in the first game, right when he does 2. Bc4, do e6

 

May I ask why u say that? I would think d5 or Nc6 could be possible good follow ups but is there any major advantage to playing e6 a couple moves earlier?

e6 threatens d5 and it hits the bishop

Is immediately threatening d5 that big of a priority, and regarding the bishop a nf6 and d5 push could take care of it, or a more unorthodox a6 and b5?

See the engine and the explorer

Avatar of Ethan_Brollier
SamuelAjedrez95 wrote:
Ethan_Brollier wrote:

Sure, I suppose. However, OP did ask for advice. If someone TWICE YOUR RATING gives advice, even admonishment, it ought to carry a lot of weight. They're also correct. The Sicilian is one of the openings I'd never recommend to a relative beginner (along with QG, Italian, Giuoco Piano English, non-Exchange Spanish, Grunfeld, Nimzo, et cetera). I think there's a time and place to learn these openings and 1100 online blitz is NOT the place to do it. At their rating, the KID via Modern move order or Petrov's or Caro Kann will serve them far better than the whole family of openings that the Sicilian is. If they're dead set on it, I'd recommend them to play 1... g6 and make a repertoire out of c5 and putting the DSB on nontraditional squares (Snake Benoni, Pterodactyl Modern, and Hyperaccelerated Sicilian). Traditional d6 Sicilians and e6 Sicilians are not worth it at 1100 in online blitz. If OP was 1100 FIDE playing classical, I might recommend traditional Sicilians but at this level it isn't even worth learning the basics.

The OP asked for advice about how they could best learn the Sicilian. If you re-read the original post they are asking for recommendations for courses or playlists to help them learn.
++True, and I gave my advice on this. 1... g6 and play a repertoire involving a different move order to the Hyperaccelarated Dragon.

They did not ask for advice about what opening to play. That's for another thread. OP had to re-state that they had already decided they want to play the Sicilian and were only asking for suggestions about how they could learn it best. Read the earlier comments. So everything you are saying is irrelevant.
++This is simply untrue. They later added (before my post)
"adding this update to be clear, im asking if its a good idea to play the silician", to which my response is personally no, but if OP's dead set on it, don't play mainlines.

Also it doesn't matter what rating someone is. That doesn't mean their advice is good because everyone has different opinions. Besides, it's a personal choice how someone wants to play the game.
++The rating matters little (although it does matter a bit), but the experience is invaluable. And while it's a personal choice of how to play the game, their personal choice was to ask for advice, a very smart sentiment for a beginner.

You ever heard of being a "backseat gamer"? When someone is trying to play the game and the other person is telling them what to do instead of letting them play it. That's what you're doing.
++Am I? Am I really? For giving advice to someone who asked it from me? Is that really what I'm doing. Interesting.

 

Avatar of Ethan_Brollier
SamuelAjedrez95 wrote:

Also you said A LOT of openings. Like you are saying don't play: The Italian, The Spanish, The Queen's Gambit, English, Nimzo-Indian, Grünfeld, etc. A lot of these are super elementary openings. Even the Italian? That's just being silly. This is the most basic form of developing. Everyone should learn this at the start as it teaches you a lot of basic traps and tactics to be aware of.
++I never said I didn't. I play the English, the non-exchange Spanish, the Italian, and the Nimzo, but I also have approximately a year's worth of experience and study in these openings compared to OP. As for 'everyone should learn this at the start', that is personal opinion, which, in my opinion, is incorrect. It's up to OP to decide whether or not either of our opinions are worthwhile.

In other words only play the openings that you say. This is super patronising. Like you assume that the person is just dumb and has no capacity to learn anything about an opening so they should just play as simple as possible to survive.
++I NEVER said that. Please don't put words into my mouth. I play a ragtag bunch of offbeat openings and unnamed gambits that I would never recommend to anyone. And again, this is merely a recommendation. If they want to make include in their repertoire: mainline Najdorf, Gruenfeld, and Semi-Slav, more power to them. However, your next assumption about me is half-correct and also my response. They should play as simple as possible. They will learn as they go along, but playing simply is a prerequisite to play theory. I've seen my fair share of Fried Liver players who fall apart after getting their preferred position because they only memorized theory and didn't know how to play basic chess.

Learning an opening can actually help someone improve in the game.
++I agree. I merely disagree about their choice of which opening will improve them the fastest.

It's best that they pick the opening they want to play, not the opening that YOU want them to play.
++And regardless of what I do, they will. My influence over OP is little to none, I'm essentially floating my two cents into the void. However, if I can help them make a decision that I believe they will enjoy and improve with, all the better.

Avatar of MURICARAH
SamuelAjedrez95 wrote:

Against 2. Bc4, e6-d5 is a good plan because it expands in the centre with tempo on the bishop so it achieves both these things.

a6 with the idea of b5 is good but e6 needs to be played first or white has Bd5. Nc6 is good as well and e6 will be played next.

Playing this Kan structure with e6 and a6 is generally the best setup against Bc4. The same against the Smith-Morra and Fischer-Sozin attack but they are more dangerous as white has pressure on the d file. In the Fischer-Sozin Attack white has more ideas with the d4 knight as f4-f5 can be played and also Bxe6 works in some situations.

ah I understand now, thanks for that!

Avatar of Ethan_Brollier

Here is a Sicilian repertoire that I think is simple and effective enough to be played at a U1200 level:

Sicilian Defense: O'Kelly, Normal System 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 a6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4/Qxd4

Sicilian Defense: O'Kelly, Venice System 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 a6 3. c3:

...Gambit Line 3... d5 4. exd5 Nf6

...Barcza Line 3... Nf6 4. e5 Nd5;

...'French Line' 3... e6 4. d4 d5 5. e5;

French Defense: Advance, Paulsen Attack 1. e4 c5 2. c3 e6 3. d4 d5 4. e5 Nc6 5. Nf3 Qb6

Sicilian Defense: Kan Variation 1. e4 c5 2. d4 e6 3. Nf3 cxd4 4. Nxd4 a6

Sicilian Defense: Closed, Traditional Line, 3. Nf3 e5 4. Bc4 d6 5. d3 Be7

Sicilian Defense: Grand Prix Attack, 3...g6 4. Nf3 Bg7 

Sicilian Defense: Closed, Fianchetto Variation, 3...g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. d3 d6 6. Nge2 Nf6 7. 0-0 0-0 8. f4

The O'Kelly does incredibly well against 3. d4. If you find you don't like mainline O'Kelly, 4... e6 transposes to the Kan.
If they know what they're doing or main Delayed Alapin, the Venice System still works rather well.
If they play one of the Grand Prix setups, the Dragon bishop will become incredibly useful.
If they play the Alapin, you can play 2... e6 to try to transpose to an Advance French.
(If 4. exd5, theory follows 4... exd5 5. Nf3 Nc6)
If they play the Smith-Morra Gambit, 2... e6 to transpose to the Kan variation.
(If 2... d5, White has the option to transpose to Old Benoni or Benoni/Benko, which means that at higher ELO values, learning to properly accept the Smith-Morra is probably better)
If they play the Closed Sicilian without the Grand Prix, the Botvinnik Center will make it hard for White to retain anything more than equality.

Avatar of Impractical

The O'Kelly is popular.  You have to be comfortable against the Maroczy Bind

 

Avatar of Ethan_Brollier
Impractical wrote:

The O'Kelly is popular.  You have to be comfortable against the Maroczy Bind.

I hadn't taken this move into consideration, so thank you for bringing it to light. The Geller Line seems quite reasonable for Black here, however. 

 

 

Avatar of pfren
Ethan_Brollier wrote:
Impractical wrote:

The O'Kelly is popular.  You have to be comfortable against the Maroczy Bind.

I hadn't taken this move into consideration, so thank you for bringing it to light. The Geller Line seems quite reasonable for Black here, however. 

 
 

 

 

Reasonable or not, it is stupid to suggest for beginners to play like that (temporarily pawn down, and a bishop pair to the opponent). Nine and a half times out of then they will commit Hara-Kiri from this position.

Avatar of MaetsNori

I like to play d6 + a6, and then wing it from there. No extensive theory memorization needed.

(This, though, does mean that I sometimes get punished for not knowing proper theory. But the ease of not having to remember theory is a bonus to counterweigh the risk.)

With the Sicilian, I find it easier to worry more about key squares, development schemes, and common pawn structures, rather than worrying about specific lines and variations (which can be far too much for most of us mortals to keep in our heads).

For example, I often like to aim for this kind of structure (a Scheveningen structure, with a pawn on a6), as black:

I don't always acheive this, but it gives me an idea to aim for - one that I can adjust and change, depending on what my opponent does.

One practical approach is to look through a database, and choose master-level games with the specific kind of pawn structure that you want to play. If you like the d6+e5 structure, for example, then look for those kinds of games. Browse through a lot of them. You'll start to see common moves and ideas, the more games you look through ... things that you can start to look for (or practice) in your own games.

Avatar of pfren
IronSteam1 wrote:

I like to play d6 + a6, and then wing it from there. No extensive theory memorization needed.

(This, though, does mean that I sometimes get punished for not knowing proper theory. But the ease of not having to remember theory is a bonus to counterweigh the risk.)

With the Sicilian, I find it easier to worry more about key squares, development schemes, and common pawn structures, rather than worrying about specific lines and variations (which can be far too much for most of us mortals to keep in our heads).

For example, I often like to aim for this kind of structure (a Scheveningen structure, with a pawn on a6), as black:

I don't always acheive this, but it gives me an idea to aim for - one that I can adjust and change, depending on what my opponent does.

One practical approach is to look through a database, and choose master-level games with the specific kind of pawn structure that you want to play. If you like the d6+e5 structure, for example, then look for those kinds of games. Browse through a lot of them. You'll start to see common moves and ideas, the more games you look through ... things that you can start to look for (or practice) in your own games.

 

True, the Najdorf does not require extensive memorization. Just 474 lines, at most.

Avatar of Impractical

happy IM pfren, lol !  With diagrams too?

Avatar of MaetsNori
pfren wrote:

True, the Najdorf does not require extensive memorization. Just 474 lines, at most.

It's a theoretical tome, for sure.

But I like to dodge much of the theory by playing 6... e6 against nearly everything - a tip I learned from John Emms' Play the Najdorf: Scheveningen Style.

Avatar of pfren
IronSteam1 wrote:
pfren wrote:

True, the Najdorf does not require extensive memorization. Just 474 lines, at most.

It's a theoretical tome, for sure.

But I like to dodge much of the theory by playing 6... e6 against nearly everything - a tip I learned from John Emms' Play the Najdorf: Scheveningen Style.

 

When Emms wrote the book, the Keres Attack was supposed to be a problem. Today we know that it is not a big deal, so using your move order you just play the Sheveningen with the need to learn MORE lines than following the normal Sheveningen move order.

So, you don't "dodge much of the theory", actually the opposite could be claimed.

Avatar of MaetsNori

Hmm... did not know that. I appreciate the heads up. thumbup

Avatar of Ethan_Brollier
pfren wrote:
Ethan_Brollier wrote:
Impractical wrote:

The O'Kelly is popular.  You have to be comfortable against the Maroczy Bind.

I hadn't taken this move into consideration, so thank you for bringing it to light. The Geller Line seems quite reasonable for Black here, however. 

Reasonable or not, it is stupid to suggest for beginners to play like that (temporarily pawn down, and a bishop pair to the opponent). Nine and a half times out of ten they will commit Hara-Kiri from this position.

I'm realizing that I chose a different line than my original choice for U1200. The one I recommended would be for my level of play, ~1600-1700 play. My recommendation for U1200 would be this line.

 

Avatar of SamuelAjedrez95
Ethan_Brollier wrote:

++True, and I gave my advice on this. 1... g6 and play a repertoire involving a different move order to the Hyperaccelarated Dragon.

++This is simply untrue. They later added (before my post)
"adding this update to be clear, im asking if its a good idea to play the silician", to which my response is personally no, but if OP's dead set on it, don't play mainlines.

++The rating matters little (although it does matter a bit), but the experience is invaluable. And while it's a personal choice of how to play the game, their personal choice was to ask for advice, a very smart sentiment for a beginner.

++Am I? Am I really? For giving advice to someone who asked it from me? Is that really what I'm doing. Interesting.

I don't know why you recommend this stuff. There is no point messing around with move orders to enter the Accelerated Dragon. It's not that big of a deal to learn the Rossolimo compared to any of the lines in the other move orders.

You recommend all these weird, offbeat lines all for the sake of "avoiding theory". As if it's so important to "avoid theory" compared to actually learning something and playing a good opening. It happens a lot that lower level players try to play some offbeat line against a higher level player to try to "avoid theory" and then just end up with a terrible position. Also because if you are constantly avoiding learning anything then you are not even going to understand the offbeat line that you play. It's not that worth it to avoid main lines in order to just play a bad position where you get yourself into a mess. Sooner or later players will start punishing you for it.

They said they already thought about whether they should play the sicilian before making the post and already decided to do so. The original post was not asking anyone to tell them which opening to play.

Avatar of SamuelAjedrez95

You may as well play this if you want to avoid theory so badly:

Wow, so offbeat. Opponent will not be prepared! This is my new gambit. It's where you gambit your king to avoid theory.

Avatar of sndeww

Back when I played the alekhines defense, I had to learn a lot of theory to play without theory. A very strange contradiction. Nowadays I play both the Sicilian and Kings Indian, and strangely enough I have been getting good positions out of the opening despite learning less theory.

I’ll probably need to book up on the rossolimo though, because my last four Sicilian otb games were all rossolimos and I lost all of them…