Originally posted by exigentskyAt what point did your line become a Najdorf? You're line is more of a general Sicilian than a specific Najdorf.
Anyway, back to the question, what line has worked best for you against the Najdotf? (For me it has been 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. Bb5+ so far.)
You also ask about database stats from GM games, but I don't think this will suggest a good approach for yourself. For example, do you use GM stats to choose all your openings? I guess not; I'm sure you've found your own preferences. What works for a fulltime GM may not work well for you.
Why not study some Sicilian games and see what appeals and make sense to you?
Your right, it would work against many Sicilian defenses, but I use it to quell Najdorf intentions. Thus it is my line against the Najdorf and many other possible Sicilian variations. I like it because it seems to often take Black out of his comfort zone.
For me, the best way to beat the Najdorf is to avoid it entirely.
Originally posted by exigentskyWhy start a thread about "beating the Najdorf" when you want to talk about the Moscow variation?
Your right, it would work against many Sicilian defenses, but I use it to quell Najdorf intentions. Thus it is my line against the Najdorf and many other possible Sicilian variations. I like it because it seems to often take Black out of his comfort zone.
For me, the best way to beat the Najdorf is to avoid it entirely.
The four most used lines against the Najdorf proper depend on where White plays a Bishop on turn 6. They are: Bg5 (the "main" and probably most aggressive line), Be3 (which will often transpose into the English Attack against the Scheveningen), Bc4 (Fischer's old favorite) and Be2 (the most positional treatment). f3 is becoming more popular though it often leads into the English Attack and a3 is a "flavor of the month".
Careful with stats, though. When I'm checking out stuff like this I alway make sure I check when the lines were played, the relative ratings of the players, whether they were blitz games, etc. Don't accept that c3 is a better move than d4 just because it performs better. More likely it just leads to an unclear position where your knowledge fo the latest lines isn't so important and you have to rely on actual chess playing!
I'm not one of these people who think opening study is useless, though, as long as you learn the plans and not just the variations. Reading through annotated opening guides can be very useful, why should reading through whole annotated games be considered some of the best training you can do and reading through annotated openings not be so?
After
1. e4 c5
2. Nf3 d6
3. d4 cxd4
4. Nxd4 Nf6
5. Nc3 a6
My Chessbase big database 2006 (pruned to only contain games by players rated >2400) gives the following stats...
Bc1-a3 2717 games 55%
Bf1-e2 2372 games 52%
Bc1-g5 1624 games 53%
f2-f4 1100 games 52%
Bf1-c4 922 games 50%
f2-f3 523 games 56%
there are a few more lines including g2-g3, a2-a4, Qd1-f3 which have fewer than 500 games played. Personally I find Bc1-g5 works well.