Scillian & 1.d4 Link

I have noticed a pattern accross a lot of my games, most players who respond to my 1.e4 opening with 1.c5 the scillian defense also open with 1.d4 it is almost predictable. As i dont play either of these openings I wonder if anyone could explain some sort of link, is there something behind both these openings that attracts a certain type of player?

perhaps you would based on similar structures , but this c5 d4 thing is a pattern ive noticed not just online but otb also

There might be a small bias in that direction, based on the idea that "what the super GM's play most often, I should play most often."  And even though there's a pretty good balance between 1.d4 and 1.e4 in the big picture of things, in high-profile events, there's a definite bias toward 1.d4.  As well as toward the Siclilian.

But beyond that, I don't think there's much to support such a correlation.

Your right about top level chess, all top level players have a broad repetiore when it comes to openings but its just a pattern i have noticed against people i play.

1) Trend. If a player choose his opening and defense based on trend (or statistics), then 1.d4 and 1.e4 c5. Also if the player is just trying to copy the openings of his hero (where the hero is just trying to avoid draws).

2) Positional. 1.d4 is chosen by positional players, and against 1.e4 you have only 1...c5 and 1...c6 (where the Sicilian is more favored).

Funny. I invariably play both 1. d4 and 1. ...c5.  I've never really thought of them as being linked.  Occasionally, I throw in a 1. c4, just so I can play Sicilian as white.

I play the Sicilian because it gives black more attacking options than other defenses, and I play 1. d4 for precisely the same reasons.

I also really dislike the Ruy Lopez(positional battling for the centre), because I believe most of my opponents would have a much better understanding of the lines that arrive from it than I do.

Huh?

Whoops.  I meant 1. c4

Looking at the board backwards. :)

I'll go backand change it.

 Thanks.

What is known as a "Reversed Sicilian" is actually not a Sicilian AT ALL.

I'm not here to talk about the aptness of the names given to openings, nor whether said names are deserved or not.  As is obvious from my play, I don't study chess, I just enjoy playng the odd game.

So when I say that I play c4 to play the sicilian as white, it's because that's why I play it.  Not because it's named anything, but because I feel comfortable with the lines that arise from it, and their similarities(for me, at least) with the sicilian defense. 

c4 is an English and bears only a few things in common with the Sicilian. Anyway, back to the point; I too have noticed this d4 / c5 link by a number of players both over the board and online. I think they become more comfortable over time with strategic positions instead of the often tactical lines that can derive from the various responses to e4; it simply suits their style of play and attempt to steer a game down these paths.

I used to be D4/C5 player I think that my thinking at the time was, "Wow I sure do love playing the Sicilian, I sure wouldn't want to face somebody playing this." And then played d4 to make sure I didn't have to go against it. Now I'm more willing to budge and play e4 half the time.

Huh?!

That damn Karpov, playing 1. ... e5 so often when it's not allowed!

not to mention Nf6... or anything else thinking about it!