Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Only Chess Forum

Only Chess Forum

  1. 14 Feb '13 18:48
    I know the queens gambit and the sicilian are 2 of the best chess openings. But i never play them, ever. You can mock this point but I think its wrong to give away to your opponent to early which side you are castling. I think Kasparov said the secret of beating the sicilian is just to attack the castle, thats what i do, with mixed success.

    Does anyone else have this reluctance? Am i wrong to rule out these openings?
  2. 14 Feb '13 19:05
    Originally posted by e4chris
    I know the queens gambit and the sicilian are 2 of the best chess openings. But i never play them, ever. You can mock this point but I think its wrong to give away to your opponent to early which side you are castling. I think Kasparov said the secret of beating the sicilian is just to attack the castle, thats what i do, with mixed success.

    Does anyone else have this reluctance? Am i wrong to rule out these openings?
    just try and play anything - it doesn't matter too much against the amateur level internet chess players - with the rare exception of strong amateurs such as david tebb
    - that you'll play. Oh and a plethora of chess engine cheats where you'll lose whatever you play - unless you are one of a small, rare group of online players who is strong.
  3. 14 Feb '13 19:07 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by e4chris
    I know the queens gambit and the sicilian are 2 of the best chess openings. But i never play them, ever. You can mock this point but I think its wrong to give away to your opponent to early which side you are castling. I think Kasparov said the secret of beating the sicilian is just to attack the castle, thats what i do, with mixed success.

    Does anyone else have this reluctance? Am i wrong to rule out these openings?
    the reasons for employing the Sicilian and the queens gambit are not dependent upon which side one is prepared to castle upon, but the centre and control of certain strategically important squares. One should not be deterred because of giving away a little information, after all, after white plays his opening move, he has divulged a little information, as does black with his. The reticence about playing the Sicilian is that its complicated and sharp, which is not to everyone's taste. I gave up playing the Najdorf for the very reason you specify, i was fed up of getting my castle stormed.
  4. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    14 Feb '13 19:47
    Originally posted by e4chris
    I know the queens gambit and the sicilian are 2 of the best chess openings. But i never play them, ever. You can mock this point but I think its wrong to give away to your opponent to early which side you are castling. I think Kasparov said the secret of beating the sicilian is just to attack the castle, thats what i do, with mixed success.

    Does anyone else have this reluctance? Am i wrong to rule out these openings?
    Bobby Fischer said 1.e4 is best by test. He also said that in his opinion the King's Gambit was busted and showed how it loses by force. He said that White can always play differently, in which case he merely loses differently. But as Black he did play many games on the Black side of the Sicilian Defense. He seemed to favor the Grunfeld and King's Indian defenses against the Queen's Pawn.

    The old American grandmaster Reuben Fine, who I have great respect for, preferred the Slav Defense as a solid defense against the Queen's Gambit. But in any opening system, one must study it and determine its strengths and weaknesses as well as learn the pitfalls and traps associated with them. I think it depends on one's psychology of mind as to what opening system is best for him at any particular time and place.
  5. 14 Feb '13 20:30
    First,
    you can't avoid giving informatin to the opponent.Every move you make is an information.Instead , you should try to "read" better the information you can get from your opponent's moves.Many(including me) don't carefully examine their opponent's last move.A lot of blunders(and not only ) would be avoided if they did.
    Second,
    it doesn't matter what opening you play and what opening you don't play.What matters is the "reasons".The reasons , you mention for not playing Sicilian defense, are wrong(although the decision is , probably correct) so I assume(and maybe I'm wrong) that the reasons you play the opening you have chosen to play(which I don't know what it is) are also wrong.
    Play something because you understand it.If you play moves you don't fully understand clearly means that you get middlegame you don't fully understand and experience , although great teacher , needs too much time to teach you everything.You must help her.Be sure you always know what to do and you always have a plan and a bigger picture in mind.
    It doesn't matter what Carlsen , Kramnik or Aronian is playing.They need complicated positions that give a lot of winning chances.You need to understand simple positions before playing and trying to understand the complicated ones.And simple positions have as many winning chances as you need to have and as many as you can handle (for now).
  6. Subscriber Paul Leggett
    Chess Librarian
    14 Feb '13 22:39
    If you leave your king in the center, your opponent does not have to guess as its location- and it's easier to attack there.

    Castling also brings a rook closer to the center of the board, as opposed to being tucked in a corner. Castling is an attacking move in the hands of a good player.

    You can get away without castling against poor opponents, but that doesn't mean anything, as you can get away with all sorts of stuff against poor opponents. That's why they are poor opponents.
  7. 14 Feb '13 23:21
    Originally posted by e4chris
    I know the queens gambit and the sicilian are 2 of the best chess openings. But i never play them, ever. You can mock this point but I think its wrong to give away to your opponent to early which side you are castling. I think Kasparov said the secret of beating the sicilian is just to attack the castle, thats what i do, with mixed success.

    Does anyone else have this reluctance? Am i wrong to rule out these openings?
    How in the world does playing the Queen's Gambit rule out castling Queenside???

    You may for instance want to peruse Colin Couch's excellent
    "The Queen's Gambit Declined 5 Bf4!"
    with lots of lines in which White castles Kingside ---
    and lots of lines White castles Queenside.
  8. 15 Feb '13 00:35
    Originally posted by YourWorstKnightmare
    How in the world does playing the Queen's Gambit rule out castling Queenside???

    You may for instance want to peruse Colin Couch's excellent
    "The Queen's Gambit Declined 5 Bf4!"
    with lots of lines in which White castles Kingside ---
    and lots of lines White castles Queenside.
    i played the queens gambit when i started chess, but i don't like it now, it gives black such a bad game i play e5 against d4 now. The sicilian is very strong and i loose to it sometimes, re leaving your king in the centre, thats just what i do, wait til 0-0, attack the castle, make them defend it, then 0-0-0, so they don't have enough time to attack me, sometimes that goes badly wrong though, not being attacked in the center but loosing to blacks attack on my castle.