Originally posted by no1marauderYou're quite right,the Petroff would be a better choice.One problem though,I don't think it would fit paul at all.I agree with you,he should be playing the sicilian,that should suit him fine.
You have a point, but if Paul can't be converted to the Sicilian (I would think it fits his game) probably the best choice left is the Petroff although you have to be aware of its little traps. It's pretty solid and pretty simple but I see a few really good players on the site are using it (Cludi recently beat me in a siege game with it).
...[text shortened]... openings more power to them! Personally, I'm very happy to see 2 ...... d6 played against me!!
You're still missing the point of the Larsen variation though.Black does NOT get a cramped game.I would never recommend Paul to play a cramped game.
You know, I wanna play the sicilian, I really do. Thing is, I suspect I could teach myself japanese in the time it would take to learn it. Apart from the huge amount of theory in each of the main open sicilian lines (I wouldn't dare take on the najdorf, maybe the dragon...), there's the Bb5 lines, the c3 lines, the Bc4 lines, the Nc3 lines, the morra gambit, transpositions into the french, the Rauzer, the Fischer-Sozin, the wing gambit, the grand prix, any amount of maroczy stuff... and that's just the ORTHODOX stuff! let alone that many of white's unorthodox moves seem to be insanely dangerous. How do you sicilian players get a handle on this?
Originally posted by paultopiaPlay, lose, analyse and play again. AKA Test & Learn.
You know, I wanna play the sicilian, I really do. Thing is, I suspect I could teach myself japanese in the time it would take to learn it. Apart from the huge amount of theory in each of the main open sicilian lines (I wouldn't dare take on the najdorf, maybe the dragon...), there's the Bb5 lines, the c3 lines, the Bc4 lines, the Nc3 lines, the morra g ...[text shortened]... orthodox moves seem to be insanely dangerous. How do you sicilian players get a handle on this?
I'm not a Sicilian player, though ...
actually i was down the exchange, not a full piece...
second of all, i had plenty of obvious tactics by the 11th move that would have won which i missed, tactically i messed up but paultopia's opening was terrible... And yes the philidor larsen variation is crapmed and defensive, the petroff might be drawish but it is more dynamic and aggressive than the philidor! and the petroff encourages early exchanges which leads to an open center and early middlegame...
Originally posted by GambitzoidYou are completely wrong. It's mind boggling to see you post the wrong ideas over and over again. He played the wrong move order, which gave him a bad position. You played obvious moves and still managed to lose material. If anything you were losing. You say you missed tactics, but he messed the opening and dropped a knight for you, so you are even. You didn't win because the philidor "sucks"...you won because he had no idea what he was doing. And he was still beating you. The Larsen variation has no passive tendencies about it. It is not even defensive. Here is a great game:
actually i was down the exchange, not a full piece...
second of all, i had plenty of obvious tactics by the 11th move that would have won which i missed, tactically i messed up but paultopia's opening was terrible... And yes the philidor larsen variation is crapmed and defensive, the petroff might be drawish but it is more dynamic and aggressive than th ...[text shortened]... nd the petroff encourages early exchanges which leads to an open center and early middlegame...
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 d6! ( I think it deserves it!)
3. d4 exd4
4. Nxd4 g6 (Ah...the right move order, in which white gets nothing)
5. Nc3 Bg7( Still no knight to pin!)
6. Bf4 Nc6
7. Nxc6 bxc6
8. Bc4 Rb8
9. Qc1? d5!
10. exd5 Rb4
11. Bb3 Qe7+
12. Be3 Ba6!
13. Qd2 Rd4!
14. Qc1 Nf6
15. f3 Bh6
16. Nf2 Ng4+!!
17. fxg4 Qf6+
18. Kg1 Rd1+!
Originally posted by GambitzoidTrue,at move 11 you had winning tactics,you missed them.At move 16 white(you) had 6 pawns and 2 rooks,black(paul) had 6 pawns,a knight and a bishop.White had no clear threats to try and regain some material.You call that down an exchange,I say you're down a full piece but in return got an exchange.I don't know about you,but to me,in that position,white was losing.However,it doesn't prove anything towards the soundness of the opening.One game can't prove much.And certainly not when played by players of our level.
actually i was down the exchange, not a full piece...
second of all, i had plenty of obvious tactics by the 11th move that would have won which i missed, tactically i messed up but paultopia's opening was terrible... And yes the philidor larsen variation is crapmed and defensive, the petroff might be drawish but it is more dynamic and aggressive than th ...[text shortened]... nd the petroff encourages early exchanges which leads to an open center and early middlegame...
You're right,Paul played the opening terrible.That doesn't mean the opening sucks.If I play a sicilian wrong,does that mean it sucks?
If you think the opening line I mentioned in this thread,gets black a cramped game,then I must conclude you do not know what cramped means.
I never ever said the Petroff wasn't better than the Philidor,Larsen variation.Heck,I used it myself for 10 years!But aggressive and dynamic is not what comes to mind when I think of the Petroff defense.
But,all right,I've learned my lesson.In the future I will think twice before I decide to make a 'non-mainstream' recommendation or statement.I have better things to do ,than come to this forum to defend the viability of opening lines.Like getting drunk,for instance.
That's the last I will say about this.Have a nice day.
Sir Lot.
Greetings,
1. The Petroff
The Petroff is hard as a rock excellent defence it's one of my
favorite replies to 1.e4 e5 next to the sicilian defence.
3. The Latvian (?!)
No don't play Latvian Gambit suicide you can catch a Player off gaurd if
they aren't very good or don't study but that's not happening
against better Opponents (grin)
4. Something else???
Have you tried Scandinavian/center counter 1.e4 d5 ? it's a
good chance to equalize for black.
What on earth is black supposed to do after 6. Bg5? Resign? It seems like that move just forces weaknesses. If black lets it stay there, the fianchettoed bishop can be forced off at will.
I don't see how the fianchetto'd B can be "forced off." What do you mean? Are you talking about Qe2 and then Bh6? That's nothing to worry about.
In Game 741591, I don't see why it bothered you so much. What was so terrifying about it?
I almost lost on the spot trying to clear my pieces to castle queenside.
Why was castling Queenside so important?
Yet, I couldn't castle kingside. HE would have immediately gotten the dragon bishop traded off
That only matters if he keeps that color Bishop and kills your Bishop - by trading with a Knight for example. It's not really an issue in my opinion if you have a weak color complex if your opponent doesn't have that color B.
or forced the horribly weakening h6 push.
That push isn't that awful, is it?
Well, 7... Qe7 was a terrible move
Why?
Certainly can't push g5. My calculation after that is very simple: 7. ... h6 8. Be3 g5 9. o-o-o o-o 10. f4 resigns 1-0.
You'd resign after that? Wow. There's an attack there, sure, but it's not all that bad yet.
The Philidor been recognized as an inferior opening for a least a hundred years
I've never heard this. I've heard it was somewhat constricted and passive, but hardly inferior.
Ok,so no reason,other than everyone says so.If that's good enough for you,fine.Not for me,I'd much rather 'jerk around' and make up my own mind.
I agree. Paul can always stop using Philidor if he finds out it doesn't work. In the process, he will have learned the opening from the inside and learned specifically why it doesn't work for him, and how to attack it.
By the way, I don't reject the Philidor 'cuz "everyone says so", I reject it because it leads to a cramped and difficult game for Black in my opinion. That this opinion is backed up by statistics in databases is something I would choose to consider
That makes sense.
How do you sicilian players get a handle on this?
I don't worry about it. I rely on knowing the fundamentals of the game and learn when someone uses some specific trick to take my Sicilian out. Over time I get to know it better and better.
Not many of my opponents know the theory that well either.
Originally posted by slushpuppydreamthese are some good suggestions. Maybe you should consider them.
Greetings,
1. The Petroff
The Petroff is hard as a rock excellent defence it's one of my
favorite replies to 1.e4 e5 next to the sicilian defence.
3. The Latvian (?!)
No don't play Latvian Gambit suicide you can cat ...[text shortened]... 4 d5 ? it's a
good chance to equalize for black.
Especially the petroff and the scandinavian are good recommendations in my opinion.
