Originally posted by SquelchbelchI have a friend who's playing tournaments in Latvia atm.. he blundered away a draw against Sveshnikov (the younger one), amongst other, and I consider him a rather strong player. He did play the smith-morra gambit for some time, but I think he does not use in any more in his main repertoire, after some time. I think if your opponent does not know the defense, it can be very strong.. This is not an example of a "solid" choice of opening which goes all the way, if you ask me.
No repertoire is going to be perfection.
The point being that concentrating on Morra accepted theory & some c3 Sicilian lines is much less learning than phonebook open/closed Sicilian theory!
That was the logic behind me choosing 2.d4 in reply to 1...c5. It severely limits black's reasonable responses.
Originally posted by Restless SoulI guess I do not understand it. I have no idea how to beat the Sicilian Defence.
The Sicilian is easy to meet once you understand it, and not have a big fear of all the lines 'you have to know by heart'...I'm not gonna tell you what to play, just pick a system you like and understand the ideas behind it and you'll be good to go.
3 edits
Originally posted by GolubWhat is your friends name? Its very possible that i know him.
I have a friend who's playing tournaments in Latvia atm.. he blundered away a draw against Sveshnikov (the younger one), amongst other, and I consider him a rather strong player. He did play the smith-morra gambit for some time, but I think he does not use in any more in his main repertoire, after some time. I think if your opponent does not know the defense, ...[text shortened]... This is not an example of a "solid" choice of opening which goes all the way, if you ask me.
P.S. I have been played 2.c3 Sicilian against young Sveshnikhov twice - first game was draw (I did let him escape in endgame) and second I won (about one and half month ago) - here is that game:
Korch - Vladimir Sveshnikov (ELO 2378)
1. e4 c5 2. c3 Nf6 3. e5 Nd5 4. g3 d6 5. exd6 e6 6. Bg2 Bxd6 7. Nf3 Nc6 8. O-O O-O 9. Na3 Bd7 10. Nc4 Bc7 11. a4 Rc8 12. d3 a6 13. Qe2 Qe7 14. Re1 Rfd8 15. Bg5 f6 16. Bd2 Qf7 17. a5 Re8 18. Be3 Qf8 19. Nfd2 Nxe3 20. Qxe3 Bd8 21. Nb3 Ne7 22. Nxc5 Nf5 23. Nxd7 Nxe3 24. Nxf8 Nxc4 25.Nxe6 Nxa5 26. Bd5 Kh8 27. Ng5 Bc7 28. Nf7+ Kg8 29. Nd6+ Kf8 30. Rxe8+ Rxe8 31.Nxe8 Kxe8 32. b4 1-0
1 edit
Originally posted by gambit3Look at the games of Anand, Fischer, Kasparov etc You are right when you say you do not understand it because its not about wheeling out some line e.g. B88
I guess I do not understand it. I have no idea how to beat the Sicilian Defence.
Look at the Fischer-Sozin attack http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessopening?eco=B88 e.g. and compare that to the Sicilian Kan
1 edit
Originally posted by Korchvery cool
Talking about opening traps - look at Game 3940013.
8.d5...
9.Bc1d2...
10.a3...
he fell right into it. I'm sure I would have been fooled as well. It looks easy AFTER it'd been played. very nice🙂
Originally posted by MoneyMaker7Is it? Then why did I win Game 3676033 against a player rated above 2000.
Squelchbucket the Morra is an incorrect opening
Just because you won one game doesn't prove an opening correct. If I played enough games I can win with 1. a4 too. I don't have time to "refute" 1. a4, but we know it violates opening principles. In fact anything that gives white an under 50% percentage in games shouldn't be correct.
Originally posted by MoneyMaker7What does "incorrect" mean? White gives up a pawn to accelerate his lead in development. Interesting chess involves making a concession in one aspect and gaining in another aspect. In the Smith-Morra, White concedes material to gain in time. Unless you can demonstrate a forced line that leads to a loss for White, it is clearly NOT "incorrect."
Squelchbucket the Morra is an incorrect opening
Originally posted by MoneyMaker7Was Miles making a big mistake when he played 1...a6 against Karpov? Theory says "yes." Reality said "no, at least not today."
Just because you won one game doesn't prove an opening correct. If I played enough games I can win with 1. a4 too. I don't have time to "refute" 1. a4, but we know it violates opening principles. In fact anything that gives white an under 50% percentage in games shouldn't be correct.
Originally posted by MoneyMaker7The poor database results for the Morra are because it has been played inaccurately.
Just because you won one game doesn't prove an opening correct. If I played enough games I can win with 1. a4 too. I don't have time to "refute" 1. a4, but we know it violates opening principles. In fact anything that gives white an under 50% percentage in games shouldn't be correct.
When the correct line is played against the black defence the results are very favourable to white.
Show me the refutation please.
1 edit
The smith-morra is not common in grandmaster games, but at club level chess it is an excellent weapon see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith-Morra_Gambit Anyone with an opening book can see the correct lines.
At RHP level many people can fall for a trap such as 1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 Nf6 6. Bc4 d6 7. e5