Hi, everyone. I'm wondering if there are any unconventional ways to refute the Sicilian that are both uncommon and strong (for mid-teen rated players).
I don't mind so much if high-level chess theory proves it to be unsound.
Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper Hi, everyone. I'm wondering if there are any unconventional ways to refute the Sicilian that are both uncommon and strong (for mid-teen rated players).
I don't mind so much if high-level chess theory proves it to be unsound.
There is no refutation of the Sicilian, it's darn sound. No one would play it if it wasn't! I think by refutation you simply mean, a playable way to face it?
Originally posted by PAWN RIOT try this...1.e4 2.c4 3.b3 4.Bb2 5.d3 6.g3 7.Bg2 8.Bb2 9.00 10.f4....depending on what black plays aim for this type of set up!
To be honest, I did not take this question very seriously (an "eye roll" question), but your answer has changed all that for me.
It's not just the moves- it's the idea of taking the game into more closed channels along lines of the English/Reti (or even Bird's Opening by transposition)-it may not be a refutation per se, but it most certainly is a refutation of what Black had intended to accomplish on his first move.
Originally posted by savage4731 If anyone had a refutation of the Sicilian they wouldnt be posting it here. They'd be out playing for the World Championship.
Yeah it's like asking for an easy way to beat the Ruy Lopez.