Originally posted by SquelchbelchAdvantages include:
2.d4
*You get an open game with natural developing moves
*You can throw Sicilian players out of repertoire & play in your comfort zone
*Most attacking chances are for White & there are many chances for Black to lose within 20 moves
*It is a dynamic opening with nuances of play but easy to grasp the fundamentals
*It's full of tactics so ideal for intermediates who want to improve
*Standard Black Sicilian moves often good for White
*Theory limited compared to tomes of Sicilian text
Game 4747353 13 move win against a player rated 2000
Game 3973851 1800 rated loses
Game 3250780 1700+ loses his way
Game 2950352 another higher rated loses to an "inferior" opening
Game 3829842 oops - more trouble!
Game 3094265 even works against lower rateds!
The Smith-morra gambit (google that) is definitely one of the major tests of the Sicilian opening. It is quite a natural gambit that leads to 2 excellent files for whites rooks as well as makes blacks queen squirmish, looking for a place to hide.
I have considered holding off playing the Sicilian for fear of this line... however, if black can defend properly (which in this case is an art!) you can make it to the endgame with an extra pawn.
1 edit
Originally posted by ChessJesterI'm gonna go ahead and politely laugh in your face. The Smith Morra is maybe good enough for equality, although I suspect with great play Black is probably better.
The Smith-morra gambit (google that) is definitely one of the major tests of the Sicilian opening.
There is a funny story about the Smith Morra Gambit. I believe it was Bent Larsen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bent_Larsen), when annotating a game between Ken Smith (of Smith-Morra Gambit fame) and Mikhail Botvinnik (who should need no introduction. Larsen wrote:
1. e4 e6? (Giving the French Defense a mistake is hilarious in and of itself)
"Better is 1...c5, winning a pawn."
Grandmasters virtually never play the Smith-Morra for one very good reason: White doesn't get enough compensation for the pawn! Having said that, I would suspect that at club level a player with a flair for tactics who enjoys having the initiative would score quite well with it as White.
1 edit
Originally posted by !~TONY~!This was San Antonio in 1972.
I'm gonna go ahead and politely laugh in your face. The Smith Morra is maybe good enough for equality, although I suspect with great play Black is probably better.
There is a funny story about the Smith Morra Gambit. I believe it was Bent Larsen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bent_Larsen), when annotating a game between Ken Smith (of Smith-Morra Gambit f ...[text shortened]... rench Defense a mistake is hilarious in and of itself)
"Better is 1...c5, winning a pawn."
Ken Smith had just written half a dozen booklets on the Morra gambit & wanted to try it at the highest level available to him.
He played & lost with it against Larry Evans & Donald Byrne who I believe were both much stronger players than Smith himself.
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1126415
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1159362
Also, theory was still very raw at the time & Smith made several early mistakes in both games.
The games proved useful though, as the most promising line in the "Evans defence" was later found for White which instead of the more intuitive 7.0-0?! is 7.Bg5! & in practice this does not allow Black to build such a solid position.
And then 7...Nf6 8.Bxf6 gxf6 9.0-0 e6 10.Nd4! gives White some hope.
e.g
[Event "TE.2001.P.00608 email"]
[Site "IECG email"]
[Date "2001.03.20"]
[Round "0"]
[White "Skeels,Jim"]
[White Elo 2256]
[Black "Boettcher,Fred"]
[Black Elo 2273]
[Result "1-0"]
[Eco "B21"]
1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 a6 7.Bg5 Nf6 8.Bxf6 gxf6
9.0-0 e6 10.Nd4 Qc7 11.Rc1 Qb6 12.Nf5 exf5 13.Qh5 Kd8 14.Qxf7 Qd4 15.Nd5 Bd7 16.e5 Be7
17.e6 Bc8 18.Rfd1 Qe5 19.Nxe7 Nxe7 20.Rc2 b5 21.Rcd2 1-0