Quote:

Let's call it fear - but they are wrong, still Black is the one who has to be afraid in the OS.

ANDREW BRETT wrote on 03/24/09 at 08:24:39:


It is, I tried it about 25 years ago. Still If I had known then what I know now, I would have continued playing the Open Sicilian. Instead I wasted a lot of time on Anti-Sicilians. So these days I recommend Open Siclian repertoires around less topical lines like 6.Be2, 6.Bc4 or a combination. Sure it will be relatively easy for Black to equalize - but then again, Kasparov was always equal after 6...a6.
Concerning the drawing tendencies of the Taimanov - who wrote again that no opening is drawish beneath 1800 (2000; 2200)?

Just play the main lines without studying them. At 1650 level your opponents aren't going to know the theory either. Just have fun!! Then go over your games afterwards comparing what happend to experts v the sicilian. You will eventualy learn a lot of theory with minimal work.

You are right, most of these f4-lines peter out to equality. However, for a club player (e.g. 1700), this probably isn't overly important.

I would like to clarify that this suggestion was not one for obtaining an advantage, but a thematically-linked Open Sicilian repertoire that would make a club player's transition to the Open Sicilian more smooth.

If the 'best' repertoire for a club player is one that can be played up to Grandmaster/World Championship/Computer Correspondence/Advanced Chess level, then there is no alternative to learning the absolute main lines, e.g:

English Attack vs. Najdorf
Sozin Attack vs. Scheviningen
Yugoslav Attack with 9.Bc4 vs. Dragon
6.Bg5 e6 7.Qd2 vs. Classical Sicilian/Richter-Rauzer
6.Be3 a6 7.Be2 Nf6 8.0-0 vs. 5...Qc7 Taimanov, meeting 8...Bb4 with 9.Na4
6.Nc6 bc6 7.Bd3 vs. 5...a6 Kan
6.Nc6 bc6 7.e5 Nd5 8.Ne4 vs. Four Knights
5.Bd3 vs. the Kan, following with a later c4 in most cases.
Maroczy Bind with 5...Bg7 6.Be3 Nf6 7.Nc3 vs. Accelerated Dragon
9.Bf6 gf6 10.Nd5 f5 11.c3 Bg7 12.ef5 vs. Sveshnikov
6.N1c3 vs. Kalashnikov
2...Nf6 3.e5
2...a6 3.c3
2...g6 3.d4 cd4 4.Nd4

There, I fixed up my post.

@ MNb: so is the Levenfish refuted?!

@ Andrew Brett:  I recently started playing the Open and don't want to go Back to Closed or other Anti-Sicilians...  As for the Kan, f4 can be played on moves 6, 7 or 8, depending on the variations (see John Emms' book on the Kan)

@ TN and Alumbrado:  time to come to the rescue and defend the f4 system!?

Thank you all for your input

Last weekend I have looked at the Loewenfisj, just out of curiosity. Even though 6.f4 Bg7 7.e5 should be almost equal White has an amazing score. After 6.f4 Nc6 7.Nf3 (7.Bb5 and 7.Nxc6 have been proven innocent since ages) Bg7 8.Bd3 0-0 9.0-0 lines with ...Qb6+ and ...b5 are interesting. But 9...d5 looks pretty good. After 10.e5 Ng4 the positions resembles the Gurgenidze; the exchange of c5 vs. d4 benefits Black. Any comment?

Agreed on both counts, for some reason I equate sozin with Velimirovic attack stuff, which is of course not always the case.

versus ...e5 in Najdorf the Popovic plan with Nb3 is very positional and probably a better option than Davies Nde2

Here I must contradict. The Sozin old-fashioned style, ie with 0-0, is not crazy at all. It's just speedy: an early e4-e5 or f4-f5. What's more, I think it's quite underrated.