Which main sicilian variation should I play?

just to make it known, most people on rhp are idiots when it comes to Sicilian theory, and half your games will end up being 2. Bc4 or something weak like that. If you want to practice Sicilian lines, this is a bad place to do it.

but trying to find a solid Sicilian variation with little theory...gl on that

with Qf3 Nh3, d3 and Ng5

Originally posted by YUG0slav
just to make it known, most people on rhp are idiots when it comes to Sicilian theory, and half your games will end up being 2. Bc4 or something weak like that. If you want to practice Sicilian lines, this is a bad place to do it.

but trying to find a solid Sicilian variation with little theory...gl on that

Yes, I play the Sicilian nearly always with black and after c5 about 50% of people under 1500 play Bc4 and then Qf3 (for the fool's mate) and I let them do this while developing naturally the whole time.

Originally posted by YUG0slav
just to make it known, most people on rhp are idiots when it comes to Sicilian theory, and half your games will end up being 2. Bc4 or something weak like that. If you want to practice Sicilian lines, this is a bad place to do it.

but trying to find a solid Sicilian variation with little theory...gl on that

Taimanov, HAD, and Kan seem to have little theory and are also solid.

Originally posted by cmsMaster
Taimanov, HAD, and Kan seem to have little theory and are also solid.

But by playing these you also label yourself a huge sissy. Just kidding guys. But seriously... 😀

Originally posted by !~TONY~!
But by playing these you also label yourself a huge sissy. Just kidding guys. But seriously... 😀

Hey, I like the Taimanov. But you're right, all *real* men play the Dragon. 😛

What is the HAD?

I tried e4 c5 Nf3 e6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Bc5 and I think the best response to Nc3 is Nc6, Qf6 and Nge7, which is what black uses in a certain variation of the scotch, except white is forced to play nce2 instead of c3 and the f1 bishop is blocked. Am I wrong, if so correct me. And what is the "correct" response to this "lazy variation"?

I did some research on the Sveshnikov:
Against 9.Bxf6:
Take with the g pawn, then advance it to f5, if white takes, take with bishop, retreat back to e6 and play f5 with an attack, which if successful ends up gaining total of the center, material or mating the enemy king.
If white doesn't take, advance to f4.
Against 9.Nd5
Be7 Bxf6 Bxf6 then, Bg5, f5, Bh6, etc. The idea is apparently to pressure White's pawns.
Did I miss some basics?

I also looked up Accelerated Dragon, Taimanov and Kan.
I know the basics of all these, and some innovations in the Accelerated Dragon. In the Taimanov and Kan, the strategy is to trade down to an endgame, when Black's central majority comes in handy. But I have found white piece blockades vs. my central pawns to be extremely annoying. Is this prevalent in Taimanov and Kan games?

As black, I find I rarely come up against the main line variations. Often white will deviate with 2 Nc3 or 2 c3 etc. That means that whenever you come across the 'main line' otb the cobwebs need to be dusted down and you don't play your 'main line' as often as you would like.
A practical approach (echoing previous posts) would be to learn the main ideas behind your chosen variation. I would suggest playing the main line of whichever variation. The idea being that the theory is relatively stable and you are not likely to find that your chosen variation has been rendered obsolute by a novelty on move 20. I would go further to suggest avoiding variations with forcing lines as the onus is then on remembering the correct move rather than developing an understanding for the ideas and strategies behind the moves already played.

For the record, I favour the Scheveningen and have found that my chosen variation against the Keres Attack has been found wanting at move 17...but then in reality I've never got that far because I've deviated (inadvertenly) before then.

Originally posted by YUG0slav
just to make it known, most people on rhp are idiots when it comes to Sicilian theory, and half your games will end up being 2. Bc4 or something weak like that. If you want to practice Sicilian lines, this is a bad place to do it.

but trying to find a solid Sicilian variation with little theory...gl on that

The Kan actually fits this quite nicely. But I do confess to being a Sicilian novice and very un-keen to learn long forced lines the likes of which are found in the Najdorf and Dragon.

What about the Taimanov as well?

Edit: I should also learn to read the entire thread before posting 😳

well if you're gonna go with the Taimanov and Kan...then you're REALLY not going to play main lines, especially since many people have never even heard of it.

Originally posted by cmsMaster
Hey, I like the Taimanov. But you're right, all *real* men play the Dragon. 😛

me and my Accelerated Dragon feel emmasculated 😳

Originally posted by YUG0slav
me and my Accelerated Dragon feel emmasculated 😳

As you should. 😏

Originally posted by YUG0slav
well if you're gonna go with the Taimanov and Kan...then you're REALLY not going to play main lines, especially since many people have never even heard of it.

Which could be a benefit.

Originally posted by cmsMaster
As you should. 😏

QUIET!

I'll be the one laughing when I get the half point and you get a big fat zero!