|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 7 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Feb-08-04 | | Catfriend: I never play sicilian as black, but I like fighting against it as white! And in the variation we discuss, black doesn't have such a hole on d5, because he can play e6 with equality at least. |
|
| Feb-08-04 | | refutor: i didn't say there was a hole, i meant that with c4 it is more difficult for black to play ...d5 advantageously and that is worth the hole on d4 |
|
| Feb-08-04 | | Catfriend: Yes, I understood... I mentioned the safety of d5 for other people. c4 is safer also for black! White can't attack via c3-d4 or c3-b4 this way. Also, d3 becomes a weakness. Your system can be good for playing a superior opoonent, if you fear his sicilian skills. But if you, as white, want to win, it's better to find something else IMO. |
|
| Feb-08-04 | | refutor: lol...it's not my system, it is a little slow for me as well. it is annoying enough though for me not to play the accelerated dragon |
|
| Mar-09-04 | | Aliasad: Hey guys, looking for a good anti-(open)-sicilian defense? Check out the closed sicilian;1.e4 c5 2.Nc3. |
|
| Mar-23-04 | | Helloween: The closed Sicilian is drawish or better for Black with strong play. All of the lines where White plays c4 with the pawn still on e4 are notorious for being draw lines(White puts pawns on c4, d3 and e4, Black sets up a replica structure, White plays Nf3-d2-f1-e3, Black plays Be7-g5-Bxc1, and both sides maneouever around a closed cetre. Draw unless a blunder occurs. Also, it was found that 2...d5! gives Black the advantage against the Grand Prix Attack several years ago. What's with all of the anti-main line stuff anyway? There's a reason why it's called a "main line"(usually because it has been found to be, in practice, the best way to play). It is hard to improve one's tournament play without playing main lines. |
|
| Mar-23-04 | | Stavrogin: thw wing gambit provides beautiful games. Keres showed how to handle it...
I play it every week, just cause I like the feel of it. Would love to see somebody, maybe Morozevich, put it to use like Keres did. |
|
| Mar-23-04 | | ruylopez900: What are people's thoughts about playing Nc3 before pushing the f-pawn? |
|
| Apr-08-04 | | Dudley: I think the reason that it is suspect for white is that black can move Nd4 at some point (perhaps in response to Bb5)and if white trades with Nf3xNd5 ,whites c3 knight will have to move. It does avoid the early d5 by black, though. |
|
| Apr-08-04 | | Dudley: If you want to see a lot of wing gambit games check out George Koltinowski's collection. He always played it in simuls although he admits he wouldn't play it in a serious game. |
|
| May-29-04 | | BaranDuin: I like to play 2. d4 against the Sicilian defanse because, at my level, most people don't know any theory about the Smith-Morra gambit and they just think I 'm stupid so they start to play with less concentration. |
|
| May-29-04 | | GoodKnight: I agree. I do exactly the same against the sicilian. At my level, no one knows what to do as black, and often end up playing carelessly. The number of games I've won like this one...
Zardus vs A Steventon, 1986 |
|
Jun-17-04
 | | cu8sfan: Beautiful! Great choice for opening of the day. If your opponent is unprepared he won't know what hit him. I wonder how many average-rated players that play the Sicilian would be surprised upon meeting the Smith-Morra. |
|
| Jun-17-04 | | acirce: Not too many... the Smith-Morra is quite popular on club level so it is often known by Black players too. |
|
| Jul-05-04 | | Cecil Brown: A nice line aginst the Smith Morra gambit is the notorious Siberian Trap.
This game is a classic example G Rohit vs K Szabo, 2001 But if you click on the find similair games feature you'll find a surprising number of suckers falling for the same trap in slightly different ways. |
|
| Jul-05-04 | | Cecil Brown: This is the original game from which the trap got it's name
Kolenbet vs B Schipkov, 1987 |
|
| Jul-13-04 | | AgentRgent: I think one of the best ways to face the Smith-Morra is to decline it with 3...d3!? White isn't allowed to generate his usual initiative after 3...dxc3 4. Nxc3 and neither does he receive the positional compensation that would occur after 4. cxd4 in other declined lines. Obviously Black can snatch the pawn, weather the storm and likely win, but why allow White to play his preferred lines? |
|
| Jul-13-04 | | themindset: ever wonder what kasparov would play against the smith-morra? well, this is what i read in a magazine (kasparov playing black against the author): 1. e4 c5 2. d4 cxd4 3. c3 dxc3 4. Nxc3 e6 5. Nf3 d6 6. Bc4 Nc6 7. o-o Nf6 8. Qe2 Be7 9. Rd1 e5! supposedly this is the main line, and i've used it effectively as black to equalize. and by the way - the only true "refutation" to the mora gambit is equalization. |
|
| Jul-14-04 | | BiLL RobeRTiE: If that were true, playing 2. d4 would be no worse than entering a main line Najdorf, for example. |
|
| Jul-14-04 | | acirce: What do you mean? Can Black expect to equalize in the Najdorf? |
|
Jul-14-04
 | | IMlday: After 1.e4 c5 2.f4 d5 3.Bb5+ Bd7 4.Bxd7 Qxd7 5.d3 was Larsen's solution to the Tal gambit line 3.exd5 Nf6! when
White can offer his own gambit with 4.b3 Nxd5 5.Bb2 but after Nxf4 6.Qf3 Lesiege just gave the pawn back with 6..e5 and Black is OK.
If you want to play c4 the best move order is 2.g3.
After 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 Najdorf specialists
always play 2..d6. Then 3.f4, the Grand Prix, is better than after 2..Nc6 because it costs Black a tempo when he gets around to ..Ne7 and d5.
See Anand-Gelfand games.
1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.f4 g6 4.Nf3 Bg7 is common. 5.Bb5 Nd4= or 5.Bc4 e6= so I think 5.a3!? is better. If 5..e6 then 6.b4 is a souped up Wing Gambit and 5..d6 6.Bc4 (or 6.Be2) are interesting.
Morozevich has played 2.d3 when ..d5 looks best. Big Clamps are good but hard to get. Popular nowadays is 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.Bb5!? a Spassky idea.
I think Mora is unsound against an ..e6, Ne7-g6 Paulsen type formation.
2.b3 is interesting, another Spassky idea. After 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d3 d5 4.Nbd2 was standard Fischer but after
systems with Bd6 and Nge7 Black equalizes. Hence Smyslov's move order with 3.Qe2 to avoid that. Stem game is Smyslov-Gligoric, 1964.
I gave up Open Sicilians after 1972-1976 period produced about 6 draws for every win. Too much book!
Anybody play Portland Attack. !.e4 c5
2.Nc3 Nc6 3.g4?! e5= as in Suttles-Reshevsky US Closed 1965,
but refined by Kavalek with 3.d3 g6 4.g4!? |
|
| Jul-15-04 | | Dick Brain: <IMlday> RE: The Portland Attack with 3. g4 or 4. g4. There is a name for this? I've never played it, but I have wondered about whether it was a respectable possibility. It does make some sense since Black cannot open the center easily so on principle it may be better than attacks like 1. e4 c5 2. nf3 g6 3. h4. Maybe it will start
1. e4 c5
2. Nc3 Nc6
3. d3 g6
4. g4 e5
5. Bg2 Nge7
6. h4 d6
7. h5 Be6
8. Bg5 |
|
| Jul-15-04 | | BiLL RobeRTiE: <acirce> from what i've been told, yes =] (though the Kan looks much better than the Najdorf to my newbie eyes) |
|
| Jul-27-04 | | ruylopez900: <chessgames.com> Sorry, but I think that the name of this opening is wrong. It seems impossible for both 2.f4 and 2.d4 to be played in a single game. |
|
| Jul-27-04 | | Helloween: You are correct, <ruy>, B21 refers strictly to 1.e4 c5 2.f4. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 7 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
