GM Openings

I recently played through games by the GM's in the Mexico World Championship.

I was quite suprised by the shift in opening fashion.

Against 1.e4 Black seems now to almost always reply 1...e5 (Petroff or 2...Nc6), the few times the Sicilian was played it was the Najdorf and White won every game. (I think all openings with 1.e4 were either 1...e5 or Sicilians)

Just wondering how long you think this fashion will last and whether it will have ripple down effects on lower levels of the game?

Originally posted by najdorfslayer
I recently played through games by the GM's in the Mexico World Championship.

I was quite suprised by the shift in opening fashion.

Against 1.e4 Black seems now to almost always reply 1...e5 (Petroff or 2...Nc6), the few times the Sicilian was played it was the Najdorf and White won every game. (I think all openings with 1.e4 were either 1...e5 o ...[text shortened]... his fashion will last and whether it will have ripple down effects on lower levels of the game?

Originally posted by najdorfslayer
I recently played through games by the GM's in the Mexico World Championship.

I was quite suprised by the shift in opening fashion.

Against 1.e4 Black seems now to almost always reply 1...e5 (Petroff or 2...Nc6), the few times the Sicilian was played it was the Najdorf and White won every game. (I think all openings with 1.e4 were either 1...e5 o ...[text shortened]... his fashion will last and whether it will have ripple down effects on lower levels of the game?

Originally posted by najdorfslayer
I recently played through games by the GM's in the Mexico World Championship.

I was quite suprised by the shift in opening fashion.

Against 1.e4 Black seems now to almost always reply 1...e5 (Petroff or 2...Nc6), the few times the Sicilian was played it was the Najdorf and White won every game. (I think all openings with 1.e4 were either 1...e5 o ...[text shortened]... his fashion will last and whether it will have ripple down effects on lower levels of the game?

Originally posted by najdorfslayer
I recently played through games by the GM's in the Mexico World Championship.

I was quite suprised by the shift in opening fashion.

Against 1.e4 Black seems now to almost always reply 1...e5 (Petroff or 2...Nc6), the few times the Sicilian was played it was the Najdorf and White won every game. (I think all openings with 1.e4 were either 1...e5 o ...[text shortened]... his fashion will last and whether it will have ripple down effects on lower levels of the game?

There were indeed very few Sicilians and surprisingly, only one Nadorf game. Why?

At their level, preparation plays a huge role. Unlike the ancient, more positional and well-worn waters of the Ruy Lopez, very sharp novelties are more likely to be found in the Siclian. The Najdorf itself was only invented in the 20th century. In addition, given the oposite castling situation, it's also more likely that novelties will be deadly. White also has freer play and thus more scope for decent if objectively frowned upon ideas, like the Freak Attack. The Sicilian is a battle of two plans and not so much with immediate direct contact and with the purpse of just stopping White's aggression. Many GMs. unlike Kasparov, weren't confident to walk on the slippery grounds of the Sicilians, even if the Sicilian is completely sound.

Another related reason is that openings like the Sicilian are in many ways all or nothing. The result will be a win or a loss and rarely a draw. While the winning chance for Black also increases, White is still more likely to win in most variations. This is especially true at their level where White's initiative and first move advantage can be nurtured for a long time. The chances of a draw in the Ruy Lopez and associated openngs is much higher. In a round robin tournament, a loss as Black could be quite costly and so they felt this was a better percentage play. Draw with Black, win with White when you actually have a comfortable, if slight edge, or at least a better chance to direct the game's nature. I don't agree with this approach, but I guess they feel it suits them best. It certainly isn't so at the less than 2200 level.

BTW: Anand handled Morozevich's e5 Najdorf well. This was less challenging because, Moro played an inferior, but more strategic line. It would have been better to have Rxc3 after Qf2, instead of Nc4. However, what really lost the game is Morozevich's overagression, where he sacrificed both central pawns. In any case, the Sicilian didn't do partcularly well this tournament and was played very rarely.

Here's an OTB game I had with a 2000 rated player some time ago:

White: ?
Black: Me
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4 fxe4 4.Nxe5 Qg5 5.Ng4!? d5 6.Be2 Nf6 7.d4 Qg6 8.Nxf6+ Qxf6 9.Nc3 c6 10.Be3 Be6 11.Bh5+!? g6 12.Bg4 h5!? 13.Bxe6 Qxe6 14.Qd2 Bb4 15.a3 Ba5 16.b4?! Bc7 17.Ne2 Nd7 18.Nf4 Bxf4 19.Bxf4 Nb6! (going for the weak square of c4) 20.Bg5 Kd7 (getting the a rook into the battle without the queenside attack risk) 21.0-0 Nc4 22.Qf4 Raf8 23.Qg3 h4!? 24.Bxh4 Nd2 25.Bg5?! Rf3!? (I suppose Nxf1 was better but I can't take moves back, oh well 😞) 26.gxf3 Nxf3+ 27.Kg2 Rxh2+ 28.Qxh2 Nxh2 29.Kxh2 Qg4 30.Be3 Qh5+ 31.Kg2 Qf3+ 32.Kh2 g5 33.Rg1 1/2-1/2


Final position:

On move 25, I knew I'd get my opponent's queen, but forgot during the game that it would cost me my bishop and two rooks, oh well. 😞

Here's an OTB game I had with a 2000 rated player some time ago:

White: ?
Black: Me
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4 fxe4 4.Nxe5 Qg5 5.Ng4!? d5 6.Be2 Nf6 7.d4 Qg6 8.Nxf6+ Qxf6 9.Nc3 c6 10.Be3 Be6 11.Bh5+!? g6 12.Bg4 h5!? 13.Bxe6 Qxe6 14.Qd2 Bb4 15.a3 Ba5 16.b4?! Bc7 17.Ne2 Nd7 18.Nf4 Bxf4 19.Bxf4 Nb6! (going for the weak square of c4) 20.Bg5 Kd7 (getting the a rook into the battle without the queenside attack risk) 21.0-0 Nc4 22.Qf4 Raf8 23.Qg3 h4!? 24.Bxh4 Nd2 25.Bg5?! Rf3!? (I suppose Nxf1 was better but I can't take moves back, oh well 😞) 26.gxf3 Nxf3+ 27.Kg2 Rxh2+ 28.Qxh2 Nxh2 29.Kxh2 Qg4 30.Be3 Qh5+ 31.Kg2 Qf3+ 32.Kh2 g5 33.Rg1 1/2-1/2


Final position:

On move 25, I knew I'd get my opponent's queen, but forgot during the game that it would cost me my bishop and two rooks, oh well. 😞

Here's an OTB game I had with a 2000 rated player some time ago:

White: ?
Black: Me
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4 fxe4 4.Nxe5 Qg5 5.Ng4!? d5 6.Be2 Nf6 7.d4 Qg6 8.Nxf6+ Qxf6 9.Nc3 c6 10.Be3 Be6 11.Bh5+!? g6 12.Bg4 h5!? 13.Bxe6 Qxe6 14.Qd2 Bb4 15.a3 Ba5 16.b4?! Bc7 17.Ne2 Nd7 18.Nf4 Bxf4 19.Bxf4 Nb6! (going for the weak square of c4) 20.Bg5 Kd7 (getting the a rook into the battle without the queenside attack risk) 21.0-0 Nc4 22.Qf4 Raf8 23.Qg3 h4!? 24.Bxh4 Nd2 25.Bg5?! Rf3!? (I suppose Nxf1 was better but I can't take moves back, oh well 😞) 26.gxf3 Nxf3+ 27.Kg2 Rxh2+ 28.Qxh2 Nxh2 29.Kxh2 Qg4 30.Be3 Qh5+ 31.Kg2 Qf3+ 32.Kh2 g5 33.Rg1 1/2-1/2


Final position:

On move 25, I knew I'd get my opponent's queen, but forgot during the game that it would cost me my bishop and two rooks, oh well. 😞

Here's an OTB game I had with a 2000 rated player some time ago:

White: ?
Black: Me
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4 fxe4 4.Nxe5 Qg5 5.Ng4!? d5 6.Be2 Nf6 7.d4 Qg6 8.Nxf6+ Qxf6 9.Nc3 c6 10.Be3 Be6 11.Bh5+!? g6 12.Bg4 h5!? 13.Bxe6 Qxe6 14.Qd2 Bb4 15.a3 Ba5 16.b4?! Bc7 17.Ne2 Nd7 18.Nf4 Bxf4 19.Bxf4 Nb6! (going for the weak square of c4) 20.Bg5 Kd7 (getting the a rook into the battle without the queenside attack risk) 21.0-0 Nc4 22.Qf4 Raf8 23.Qg3 h4!? 24.Bxh4 Nd2 25.Bg5?! Rf3!? (I suppose Nxf1 was better but I can't take moves back, oh well 😞) 26.gxf3 Nxf3+ 27.Kg2 Rxh2+ 28.Qxh2 Nxh2 29.Kxh2 Qg4 30.Be3 Qh5+ 31.Kg2 Qf3+ 32.Kh2 g5 33.Rg1 1/2-1/2


Final position:

On move 25, I knew I'd get my opponent's queen, but forgot during the game that it would cost me my bishop and two rooks, oh well. 😞

Here's an OTB game I had with a 2000 rated player some time ago:

White: ?
Black: Me
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4 fxe4 4.Nxe5 Qg5 5.Ng4!? d5 6.Be2 Nf6 7.d4 Qg6 8.Nxf6+ Qxf6 9.Nc3 c6 10.Be3 Be6 11.Bh5+!? g6 12.Bg4 h5!? 13.Bxe6 Qxe6 14.Qd2 Bb4 15.a3 Ba5 16.b4?! Bc7 17.Ne2 Nd7 18.Nf4 Bxf4 19.Bxf4 Nb6! (going for the weak square of c4) 20.Bg5 Kd7 (getting the a rook into the battle without the queenside attack risk) 21.0-0 Nc4 22.Qf4 Raf8 23.Qg3 h4!? 24.Bxh4 Nd2 25.Bg5?! Rf3!? (I suppose Nxf1 was better but I can't take moves back, oh well 😞) 26.gxf3 Nxf3+ 27.Kg2 Rxh2+ 28.Qxh2 Nxh2 29.Kxh2 Qg4 30.Be3 Qh5+ 31.Kg2 Qf3+ 32.Kh2 g5 33.Rg1 1/2-1/2


Final position:

On move 25, I knew I'd get my opponent's queen, but forgot during the game that it would cost me my bishop and two rooks, oh well. 😞

Originally posted by Dutch Defense
Here's an OTB game I had with a 2000 rated player some time ago:

White: ?
Black: Me
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4 fxe4 4.Nxe5 Qg5 5.Ng4!? d5 6.Be2 Nf6 7.d4 Qg6 8.Nxf6+ Qxf6 9.Nc3 c6 10.Be3 Be6 11.Bh5+!? g6 12.Bg4 h5!? 13.Bxe6 Qxe6 14.Qd2 Bb4 15.a3 Ba5 16.b4?! Bc7 17.Ne2 Nd7 18.Nf4 Bxf4 19.Bxf4 Nb6! (going for the weak square of c4) 20.Bg5 Kd7 (getting th ...[text shortened]... queen, but forgot during the game that it would cost me my bishop and two rooks, oh well. 😞

And it has nothing to do with the thread, even if it is a good game.

Originally posted by Dutch Defense
Wow, four duplicate posts! 😵