I'd like to receive any suggestions for different openings: coz I like e4, but like many Sicilian players I hate to play against the Sicilian as white.
So I'm trying to solve this problem radically, avoiding e4...
How about 1.c4? Looks interesting but I guess there's a huge theory behind it
Originally posted by ericmittensyes actually it would be my first choice. I've considered d4, too, but I don't like the closed games who lead to cramped positions. Thanks for the suggestions!
I play the English because the theory is LIGHTER than other opening moves.
If interested I suggest picking up "The dynamic english" by tony kosten and "How to play the english opening" by anatoly karpov.
Happy Englishing!
Originally posted by el gilHold your horses - all is not lost!
I'd like to receive any suggestions for different openings: coz I like e4, but like many Sicilian players I hate to play against the Sicilian as white.
So I'm trying to solve this problem radically, avoiding e4...
How about 1.c4? Looks interesting but I guess there's a huge theory behind it
Why not try the Morra gambit (1.e4...c5 2.d4...cxd4 3.c3...dxc3 4.Nxc3) against the Sicilian Defence?
*You get a nice open game with natural developing moves
*You can throw a Sicilian player off their repertoire & play the game in your comfort zone
*Virtually all of the attacking chances are for white & there are many chances for black to lose within 20 moves
*It is a dynamic opening with many nuances of play, but it's easy to grasp the fundamentals
*It is full of tactical shots so is ideal for intermediate players or those who wish to improve their tactical skills
*Many standard Sicilian moves put Black in extreme danger if they're not careful
*Theory is limited in comparison with tomes of Sicilian text
Enough reason to give it a try?
No?...
So far, on this site with the Morra my record is +72.5
P=40
W=29
D=4
L=7
Wins against higher rateds:
Game 2950352
Game 4747353
Game 3973851
Game 4011610
Game 3829842
that's a good idea. I know the Morra but I've never played it up to now. It would be a good way to keep playing e4 (which is the most suitable White's opening for me, I think) and enjoy it whenever the Black doesn't responds with the Sicilian. While if so, I might go with the Morra.
Thanks for your idea
It also works fine OTB, without benefit of books or a database:
[Event "Club Championship"]
[Site "Crawley Chess Club"]
[Date "15.11.2007"]
[White "S. Collyer"]
[Black "T. Smith"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B21"]
1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 g6 5.Nf3 Bg7 6.Bc4 e6 7.e5 Nc6
8.Qe2 Nge7 9.O-O b6 10.Rd1 Qc7 11.Nb5 Qb8 12.Nd6+ Kf8 13.Bf4 h6
14.Rac1 Bb7 15.Rc3 Na5 16.Bb5 Bc6 17.b4 a6 18.Bxc6 Naxc6 19.a3 Nd5
20.Rb3 Nxf4 21.Qe4 Nd5 22.Rxd5 exd5 23.Qxd5 Nd8 24.Nh4 Ne6
25.Nxf7 Kxf7 26.Qxd7+ Kg8 27.Qxe6+ Kh7 28.Qxg6+ Kg8 29.Rf3 Qc7
30.g3 Qxe5 31.Qf7+ Kh7 32.Ng6 Rhf8 33.Nxe5 Rxf7 34.Nxf7 Rf8
35.Kg2 Kg8 36.Nd6 Rd8 37.Nf5 Kh7 38.Re3 Kg6 39.Nxg7 Kxg7
40.Re7+ Kg6 41.Re6+
Black resigns
1-0
Originally posted by el gilStrange, I find out that until some 1800 or so, many players that play sharp sicilian games (like dragon or najdorf) do not know how to actually exploit their position, so often all you need to do is castle long and crush them on the kingside with pawn storm and rooks behind them (together with bishop pair on say e2 and e3 squares for start.). I know I am generalizing way too much but at least it works for me quite often 😛
I'd like to receive any suggestions for different openings: coz I like e4, but like many Sicilian players I hate to play against the Sicilian as white.
So I'm trying to solve this problem radically, avoiding e4...
How about 1.c4? Looks interesting but I guess there's a huge theory behind it
Why not try 1. d4 ? It is less tactical, good for your positional game improvement and annoying for black.. I find it harder to equalize against 1. d4 than against 1. e4
The Smith-Morra is an excellent "solution" to the Sicilian Defense. IM Alex Lendermann said in a Chess Life article recently that most of his biggest upsets were when he was on the White side of the Smith-Morra Gambit.
Another intriguing possiblility is the Wing Gambit (1 e4 c5 2 b4). In some ways, the Wing Gambit seems more logical that the SMG because White sacriices a wing pawn istead of a center pawn. Also, after 1 e4 c5 2 b4 cb 3 d4, White has the "classical center" and Black's extra pawn is doubled. Check out "Gambiteer I" by GM Nigel Davies to learn how to play the Wing Gambit.
!
Originally posted by el gil1. Nf3
I'd like to receive any suggestions for different openings: coz I like e4, but like many Sicilian players I hate to play against the Sicilian as white.
So I'm trying to solve this problem radically, avoiding e4...
How about 1.c4? Looks interesting but I guess there's a huge theory behind it
Prego 🙂
Originally posted by ivan29081 d4 is "less tactical" than 1 e4? Not when I play 1 d4!🙂 I heartlily endorse the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit (1 d4 d5 2 e4!)! Titled players like to say that it's bad, but then why do even some 2500+ players "wimp out" when confronted with the BDG and play moves like 2...c6 or 2...e6 against it? Also, the BDG has a huge winning percentage on big databases.
Why not try 1. d4 ? It is less tactical, good for your positional game improvement and annoying for black.. I find it harder to equalize against 1. d4 than against 1. e4
Originally posted by gaychessplayeryeah that's a good point. for example the scandinavian has a reputation of being a bit drawish (or that it doesn't give much chances for black), but so far I've eithe gone down in flames or totally crushed my opponents. maybe on a GM level the 'common knowledge' about it might have some relevance (excluding tiviakov who seems to have a nice score with Qd6-scandinavian), but on our level it's pretty wild.
1 d4 is "less tactical" than 1 e4? Not when I play 1 d4!🙂 I heartlily endorse the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit (1 d4 d5 2 e4!)! Titled players like to say that it's bad, but then why do even some 2500+ players "wimp out" when confronted with the BDG and play moves like 2...c6 or 2...e6 against it? Also, the BDG has a huge winning percentage on big databases.
Originally posted by SquelchbelchI've been playing the morra for more than 15 years, with good results (even a win agains a gm in rapid play!), i must say it's really an exciting and lively gambit.
Hold your horses - all is not lost!
Why not try the Morra gambit (1.e4...c5 2.d4...cxd4 3.c3...dxc3 4.Nxc3) against the Sicilian Defence?
[fen]rnbqkbnr/pp1ppppp/8/8/4P3/2N5/PP3PPP/R1BQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1[/fen]
*You get a nice open game with natural developing moves
*You can throw a Sicilian player off their repertoire & play the game in your comfort ...[text shortened]... ]2950352[/gid]
Game 4747353
Game 3973851
Game 4011610
Game 3829842
But it's main drawback is that you have to learn 2 openings instead of 1, so it's not really a good way to avoid lots of theory :
You have to learn the "regular" morra gambit, when black accepts the pawn, but black also has very good ways of declining the gambit, mainly 2...Nf6 and 2...d5 forcing a transposition to another important sicilian variation : the alapin c3. (normally reached via 1.e4 c5 2.c3)
Actually the 2.c3 variation is a good way to avoid mass of theory, so that could be a good choice instead of having to know the morra too.
There is also 3...d3, less theoretical and usually leading to "maroczy bind" -like structures (white pawns on c4 and e4 "binding" black counterplay making d5 difficult)
But if like me you enjoy tactical attacking openings, you won't regret having to learn a bit more theory (actually a lot more, because the morra needs more precise knowledge than the 2.c3 alapin, which requires mainly strategical understanding of the isolated queen pawn positions)
In fact to summarize about the accepted morra gambit :
- At low to average level (until about 1800 elo) : it's particularly easy to learn, and doesn't need a lot of theory : some simple knowledge of the basic morra setup and some common tactical tricks are about all you need to know to have fun attacking games.
- At expert level (above 1800) : your opponents might try to trap you with numerous anti-morra setups, which don't refute the gambit, but usually seek to refute the "basic morra setup" which many players recite without thinking). Then you need to know quite a lot of theory not to end up worse (the excellent and recent book "the modern morra gambit", by langrock, being the best approach i think)
So go for it! at first just play the normal setup, and when you feel it's getting difficult, begin learning more and more, and you'll progressively become a feared morra expert! (by which time unfortunately people who know what you play will start to decline the gambit more often)
Sorry i forgot to explain what i meant by "basic morra setup":
It's a disposition of pieces you reach most of the time :
- Nc3 and Nf3
- Bc4
- 00
- Qe2
- Rd1
- B to e3, f4, or sometimes g5
- Rac1
Then you're ready to attack! (sometimes you'll launch the attack sooner if black doesn't play well)
- Main attacking idea : the e4e5 thrust, taking advantage of the rook d1 pinning the d6 pawn to the d8 queen (but usually the black queen will move before!)
- If black's queen takes refuge on c7 (very common in practice), the other rook on c1 will give black headaches!
On this most natural black setup pawn to e6, d6 and a6, Be7, N to c6 and f6, Q to c7 (you'll face it very often it's what most sicilian players will naturally play if they haven't prepared something against the morra), a very common idea is : first move the bishop to b3 (seems slow but open the c file for the action)
then move you c3 knight to d5! attacking the queen. It's not really a sacrifice because if e6xd5, then e4xd5 and you will win back the c6 knight while opening lines for your pieces !
There are many other tactical ideas, but these 2 are the most common and thematic.
If you need more info on this fascinating gambit, just ask me!
Just when I was starting to lose some confidence in the Sicilian after scoring better and risking far less with 1. ...e5 (in blitz), someone reminds me that e4 players are still most scared of the Sicilian. I think I'll keep playing my Dragon and Najdorf. 🙂
Anyway, I played 1. c4 followed by 2. g3 exclusively for about a year. I did alright, but the position did not have the initiative I get with 1. e4 or even 1. d4. I found myself exceeding the position's capacity for active play and now I don't play it as much. However, it is a good opening and has been played by many GMs, such as Kosten.