NMReb: thanks muchly for the advice:) - I have a natural inclination for the sveshnikov, so will read up on that, but will have to study anti-S lines before playing ...c4 in any serious game:)
Why is it that no one ever plays the open sicilian?
Sort:
i dont know about you guys but as white despite using alot of time trying to learn the closed sicilian well i have much better result with the open sicilian where i know almost no theory. i watched over a few english attack games and that was it. maybe it just fit my style better? im getting the feeling that if you know a antisicilian well you get equal position while if you dont remember an open sicilian variation you still get equal position but just loses the advantage. but maybe its just me. the open sicilian is the most fun one for sure where both players attack on each flank. i also feel whites position is alot easier to play, correct me if im wrong
Sceadungen wrote:
In my long gone e4 days I used to play 2 f4 against the Sicilian.
I had a huge plus score with it, never found a good reason to oblige black with an Open Sicilian
One of these days, I need to learn the Grand Prix Attack. I'm realizing that I can't keep playing the Smith-Morra Gambit, now that I'm facing stronger opponents who really know how to handle it. And I've started playing 1. f4 some of the time, so I might consider an early e4 against the c5 lines without d5.
Apr 5, 2010
0
#25
It's also very common for White to opt for a move order where they can bail out of an Open Sicilian if they don't like what they are seeing. As I play the Hyper Acc. Dragon this means I face almost exclusively the Alapin or I decline the Smith Morra which transposes right into the same line. I do wonder why e4 players would avoid the open sicilian- it's not like the joy of playing e4 is facing the petroff..
Apr 5, 2010
0
#26
Umm...I see almost everyone responding with open Sicilian. I have only seen closed maybe 3 to 4 times and I see a lot of Smith Morra Gambit attempts...which I don't play into...just to irritate them.
nimzo5 wrote:
It's also very common for White to opt for a move order where they can bail out of an Open Sicilian if they don't like what they are seeing. As I play the Hyper Acc. Dragon this means I face almost exclusively the Alapin or I decline the Smith Morra which transposes right into the same line. I do wonder why e4 players would avoid the open sicilian- it's not like the joy of playing e4 is facing the petroff..
maybe because playing the c3sicilian is alot more fun an open than playing with the maroczybind:)
Apr 5, 2010
0
#28
ahh, the joy of the Maroczy bind...
Of course they could play some of the Nc3 lines,
When I was young, I adored the Sicilian defense. I especially adored the Dragon Variation. First I had to abandon the Dragon Variation from the Black side because of the Yugoslav Attack, then I had to abandon the Yugoslav attack from the White side because of improvements for Black. So I took up the French Defense for Black and the Richter-Rauzer Attack for White against the Sicilian. Finally I had to give up my Richter-Rauzer Attack because of improvements for Black. So I took up Closed Sicilian as White. I had to abandon the French Defense as Black because I kept getting a cramped game. So I took up the Two Knight's Game and the Ruy Lopez Open Defense for Black. Of course this meant I had to be ready for King's Gambit, too, so I had to learn the Fischer Variation for Black.
One thing about all this abandoning: you sure learn a lot of openings.
erm so can some1 show me the checkmate with two knights?
ShadowIKnight wrote:
erm so can some1 show me the checkmate with two knights?
Actually, Checkmate with two knights is only possible in certain situations, specifically if black has pieces boxing him in, or makes a mistake. If it is only the Black King vs. Two White knights, unless black makes a mistake, white cannot win. White can never force checkmate when its two knights vs. King without black making a mistake.
Yeah Fishes i knew that, its just that the certain situation i want is with a Grand prix attack as the author of this post has said you know? i've seen it before, but i 4got and i just want to see it again. I know that you let a bishop capture your queen on d1 (i think) and then you check him with ur bishop by taking the pawn then check with the knights and its game over. Something like that. Just that no1 will show me =( Ive searched on the internet too.
Fromper wrote:
Sceadungen wrote:
In my long gone e4 days I used to play 2 f4 against the Sicilian.
I had a huge plus score with it, never found a good reason to oblige black with an Open Sicilian
One of these days, I need to learn the Grand Prix Attack. I'm realizing that I can't keep playing the Smith-Morra Gambit, now that I'm facing stronger opponents who really know how to handle it. And I've started playing 1. f4 some of the time, so I might consider an early e4 against the c5 lines without d5.
Check out my games, you'll find several wins against 2000+ rated players here using the Morra :)
The checkmate with 2 knights is sometimes possible if Black has a pawn. White gives or denies Black a tempo at critical times by blocking and unblocking the pawn with a knight. This allows him to avoid stalemate and checkmate. If the Black pawn is too distant or too advanced, this will not work.
Ricardo_Morro wrote:
The checkmate with 2 knights is sometimes possible if Black has a pawn. White gives or denies Black a tempo at critical times by blocking and unblocking the pawn with a knight. This allows him to avoid stalemate and checkmate. If the Black pawn is too distant or too advanced, this will not work.
They're not talking endgames here. Someone earlier referenced a trap in the opening (or early middlegame?) in the Grand Prix Attack where white gets a checkmate using both his knights. That's what he was asking for someone to show him. And I'm curious to see it, too, since I really don't know much about the Grand Prix, but I'd like to learn some more.
If nobody played the open sicilian, then I would always play the sicilian. If the closed was played I would just fianchetto my bishop, and get plenty of counterplay without worry of any blitzkrieg attacks. The alapin isn't hard to play against, and I like facing the smith morra.
I used to play Grand Prix attack, and i am transiting into open sicilian. With mixed feelings.
The problem with open sicilian is that the d pawn is better then the c pawn. Once white agrees to that exchange, he has burned his briges and is firmly in the ephemeral world of tempi, lead in devlopment and spatial advantage. Generally the pressure of time is on white, as if black manages to complete his development without sucumbing to any side-effects, he will be better.
However having spend quite a time with Grand Prix attack ( and reading two books on it) i have come to a conlusion it is not very dangerous for black. Black can sometimes get an equality just by playing common sense moves, and white attack is not all that terrific.
People play the c3 Sicilian and its offspring for one reason, COWARDICE!
Maybe. I know I play it for other reasons.
1. It was recommended to me when I began playing as a solid line, which it is.
2. It's relatively straight-forward to understand, no need to learn lines of theory by heart, it's actually about who can play better.
3. Not giving my opponent what he wants. If he's looking for a sharp opening with lots of theory-heavy tactical lines and I go for something safe and solid, he's not going to like it. Chess is about frustrating one's opponent's desires, so this is a good way to start.
4. It saves time. Considering I have to prepare against the French, Sicilain, Scandinavian, Pirc, Modern, Caro-Kann, etc., I need to lighten the load.