White releases tension in the center and gives up a d-pawn for a c-pawn, but Black has not weakened the area around his king at all. On top of that, White moves his knight twice in a row in the opening to put it in a vulnerable spot. Nobody would play this if not for tradition - it's like saying 'here, Black, why don't I just let you equalize on move 3'.
White can't prove an advantage against half or more of the main variations, the choice of which is largely up to Black, and all of which go very deep and are full of tricks.
The reason is you can cut out all that opening theory in your books and just write: 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 (e6 or d6) 3.d4? cxd4 4.Nxd4 = . White has a slight lead in development in exchange for an inferior center. That's all there is to it, it's a chump opening for White.
Originally posted by GambitAcceptedTHe Open Sicilian is a poor opening for White? My god, someone call up Kasparov and tell him the news. The fool is still convinced that this is the best approach for White. Too bad Kasparov just played it because everyone else did. I guess he never did his own analysis. Grandmasters these years...
Nobody would play this if not for tradition - it's like saying 'here, Black, why don't I just let you equalize on move 3'.
Originally posted by GambitAcceptedThe main disadvantage of playing exclusively Open Sicilians OTB as white is the amount of theoretical knowledge required. However, I don't know of any strong player who would argue that Open Sicilians aren't objectively white's best way to play for an opening advantage.
White releases tension in the center and gives up a d-pawn for a c-pawn, but Black has not weakened the area around his king at all. On top of that, White moves his knight twice in a row in the opening to put it in a vulnerable spot. Nobody would play this if not for tradition - it's like saying 'here, Black, why don't I just let you equalize on move ...[text shortened]... change for an inferior center. That's all there is to it, it's a chump opening for White.