Destroy the sicilian?

Originally posted by sannevssr
The starting out series is always nice but Sveshnikov players usually prefer The Sveshnikov Reloaded which is considered the best effort on the Sveshnikov.
The write Dorian Rogozenko was the second of Ponomariov before the match against Kasparov ( which never occured).
The book contains their joined analysis for that match.
But its nevertheless a very ...[text shortened]...

GM Tivakov who is usually very critcal on openingsbooks rated it 10 out of 10 in New in Chess

I have the book "The Sveshnikov Reloaded" and I agree that this is an absolutely excellent book on this opening by Rogozenko.
--

Originally posted by Doctor Rat
There are a lot of different Sicilians that have excellent pedigree. If you would still like to play the Sicilian, but the Najdorf just doesn't seem to fit your eye, you still have a lot of other choices to check out.

SCHEVENINGEN: plays for the little center of ...e6 and ...d6 instead of ...e5. Used by Kasparov to battle Karpov in 80's. Cons-- White .instead of fear, then the other variations within this system will feel fine for you.

I don't see why the Maroczy bind is a con for the accelerated dragon. It's no longer the main line, and the book Chess Openings for Black explained gives a lot of interesting weapons against it.

Originally posted by chesskid001
I don't see why the Maroczy bind is a con for the accelerated dragon. It's no longer the main line, and the book Chess Openings for Black explained gives a lot of interesting weapons against it.

I know what you're saying chesskid, but some people who play the Sicilian as Black don't like the slower positional crunch of the Maroczy, even if it is theoretically equal, so that is the only con for a player thinking about taking up the Accelerated Dragon. If a player doesn't think the Maroczy is any big deal, and they don't have any reservations about facing it, then full speed ahead! It's clear sailing for that player to enjoy all the branches that variation has to offer.

--

Originally posted by najdorfslayer
I have played Open Sicilians as White and the Sicilian as Black all my chess days so have a decent take on The Sicilian and Dr Rat's comments are pretty sound.

I think currently the Najdorf, Sveshnikov and Taimanov are the most popular variations in top GM play these days.

The Svesnkov is unlike most Sicilian variations in that Black sometimes a base, but lots of theory.
Sveshnikov/Kalashnikov: Great piece activity but poor structure.

I have also played a lot of Open Sicilians for white. As black I normally play 1...e5, but I would also like to be able to play the Sicilian, especially against lower rated players. I have noticed that quite a few GMs and strong GMs will often tend to play 1...e5 against their peers and 1...c5 against lower rated players, presumably because they feel it is easier to play for a win with the Sicilian.

So I've started to play a few Sicilians on RHP, and this is my take for what it's worth (also based on my experience on the white side):

The Dragon is in some ways a very appealing option. I do like thematic openings (eg Marshall Attack), but the problem is I simply don't believe in it! There's also a tremendous amount of critical theory, so it's hardly suitable as an occasional weapon. I could easily find myself getting hacked by a lower rated player (especially OTB). As for the Accelerated Dragon, it's quite playable I'm sure, but I find the Maroczy Bind not really to my taste for either side. It's difficult for white to break down without taking excessive risks, but if white just sits on the position, it's difficult for black to achieve much.

As a 1...e5 player, the Sveshnikov and Kalashnikov have a lot of appeal. You just delay e5 a few moves! The Sveshnikov has of course become extremely popular, and there's again a whole lot of theory to learn. The Kalashnikov seems easier to play in this respect, but my experience here (and to an extent also with the Sveshnikov) is that I've reached perfectly OK positions with black but find it very difficult to make progress in the main lines when white just wishes to hold the position.

The Kan and Taimanov Sicilians simply don't suit my style - they're not active enough for my liking - though the Scheveningen has more appeal. But one has to be well prepared for the Keres Attack, so I might prefer the option of trying to reach Scheveningen position through a Najdorf move order. In fact I've come to the conclusion that the Najdorf (with or without Scheveningen transpositions) would probably be the best Sicilian for me, but again there's a tremendous amount of theory to master (for what would not be my main weapon against 1.e4). I have to admit I haven't tried the Classical Sicilan yet. Maybe I should give that a go too...?

Originally posted by Northern Lad
I have also played a lot of Open Sicilians for white. As black I normally play 1...e5, but I would also like to be able to play the Sicilian, especially against lower rated players. I have noticed that quite a few GMs and strong GMs will often tend to play 1...e5 against their peers and 1...c5 against lower rated players, presumably because they feel it is easier to play for a win with the Sicilian.

After 2.c3 black may have problems to play for a win.

In my opinion Pirc/Modern defence is much more useful to play for win against weaker players.

Originally posted by Northern Lad
I have also played a lot of Open Sicilians for white. As black I normally play 1...e5, but I would also like to be able to play the Sicilian, especially against lower rated players. I have noticed that quite a few GMs and strong GMs will often tend to play 1...e5 against their peers and 1...c5 against lower rated players, presumably because they feel it I haven't tried the Classical Sicilan yet. Maybe I should give that a go too...?

It's definitely a lot harder to choose a specific line when your rating is over 2300. 🙂

I'm not so sure I'd look into the Classical Sicilian though, It's very theoretical - especially the Velimirovic which wouldn't be too much fun to get mixed up in. I think for your style though, the Sveshnikov makes the most sense if you're trying to avoid as much theory as possible, unfortunately there's still plenty - though less than the Dragon.

I guess I have to agree with Korch here, you should try the Pirc. You should have plenty of winning chances against lower rated players. The only variation that I'd worry about is the Classical which seems to make winning chances for black pretty difficult. If you're really set on playing the Sicilian though, you'll have to be prepared for theory since almost all of the tactical variations are loaded with it. I'd still recommend the Dragon, it's theoretical, but I sometimes wonder how many people really KNOW the theory. I think it's worth your time to take a look at Play the Sicilian Dragon and see what you think of the lines for yourself, it might take away some of your distrust for the opening.

I feel sorry for you guys worrying about different lines from move 32 in the Shvengmengvillian variation!

2.d4 is a lovely life.
😛

Originally posted by Squelchbelch
I feel sorry for you guys worrying about different lines from move 32 in the Shvengmengvillian variation!

2.d4 is a lovely life.
😛

Great minds think alike... 😉

Originally posted by Squelchbelch
I feel sorry for you guys worrying about different lines from move 32 in the Shvengmengvillian variation!

2.d4 is a lovely life.
😛

😴

Originally posted by cmsMaster
It's definitely a lot harder to choose a specific line when your rating is over 2300. 🙂

I'm not so sure I'd look into the Classical Sicilian though, It's very theoretical - especially the Velimirovic which wouldn't be too much fun to get mixed up in. I think for your style though, the Sveshnikov makes the most sense if you're trying to avoid as much t ...[text shortened]... f the lines for yourself, it might take away some of your distrust for the opening.

I have to admit that one of my characteristics (some might call it a weakness) is that I am quite dogmatic when it comes to openings. I would personally never play Pirc/Modern, because I don't believe in allowing white to take control of the centre at such an early stage. Again I would never play the French because I don't fancy spending the rest of the game wondering what to do with my queen's bishop. So it really only leaves 1...e5 and 1...c5. Maybe I'm just going to have to do some work on the Najdorf...

Originally posted by Northern Lad
I have to admit that one of my characteristics (some might call it a weakness) is that I am quite dogmatic when it comes to openings. I would personally never play Pirc/Modern, because I don't believe in allowing white to take control of the centre at such an early stage. Again I would never play the French because I don't fancy spending the rest of the ...[text shortened]... nly leaves 1...e5 and 1...c5. Maybe I'm just going to have to do some work on the Najdorf...

Do it Nortern Lad you wont regret it!!

Originally posted by najdorfslayer
Do it Nortern Lad you wont regret it!!

Yes do it! - Play Sicilian against me 😀

Originally posted by Korch
Yes do it! - Play Sicilian against me 😀

I played Sicilian against you Mr Korch...........I know I lost but I was at least equal out of the opening

Originally posted by najdorfslayer
I played Sicilian against you Mr Korch...........I know I lost but I was [b]at least equal out of the opening[/b]

I agree. But its because I did experiment with 2.b3 (instead of 2.c3 which I know very well).

Originally posted by Korch
Yes do it! - Play Sicilian against me 😀

I'm less likely to now I know you're a c3 player. Not that I fear it at all, just that if I'm going to have the Sicilian in my repetoire, I need to play mostly against open Sicilians to decide which Sicilian is right for me.