Strategy_Rules wrote on 06/20/08 at 18:24:54:



In "The Easiest Sicilian" Kolev suggests 21. Qh5 Ra7!

exigentsky wrote on 11/12/07 at 21:07:11:


In the knight sac line, 16...e4! is definitely better than 16...Rb8?! , which has seen Black struggle quite a bit. Kolev and Nedev give 16...e4 17. a4 Re8 18. Qg4 Kh8 19. Rad1 Re5! 20. Ne3 Qf6 (Black's pieces are very active and well placed for the action) 21. Qe2 Rg8! 22. Nc4 Qxf5 23. Nxe5 Bxe5 with great compensation. They provide further lines, but I'll spare the details. The point is is that instead of playing to stop White on the queenside, Black needs to put his extra piece to work and get active.

[quote]There are several variations where Black has serious positional problems and his game is not easy [quote]

Yes, I agree with almost all exigentsky wrote. There are some variations where black has serious problems, sometimes problems of strategical and sometimes of tactical type.
Actually I had much more problems finding good recourses for black in the 9.Bxf6-lines.

@exi : at least you see the point of 10...Bg7
White can recombine the two variations with 11. c3, and then play the main lines or the intriguing sacrifice 10...f5/Bg7 11. c3 Bg7/f5 12. Bd3 Be6 13. Nxb5 !?

exigentsky wrote on 09/25/07 at 03:02:07:


The problem with this line is that 10...Bg7 11.Bd3 Ne7 is better. IMO anyway. And Rogozenko's.

No one has been able to trouble them? Maybe if they're delusional. There are several variations where Black has serious positional problems and his game is not easy. The line I gave above is one example.

I've studied and played almost every Sicilian in the futile search of a favorite. Based on this, I now have only three  Sicilians I'm willing to play consistently (and without move order tricks). The Sveshnikov is one of them, but if White knows exactly what to do, it isn't pretty.

With a knowledgeable White player, Black's winning chances are greatly reduced. White simply has a comfortable edge that extends even into the endgame. It's not as bad as the Maroczy bind, but it's clear who's on top. Black's plans are fairly limited and the positions stereotypical. This may be good for specialization, but it also means that your opponents won't be surprised and that if one line becomes ugly you have nowhere to turn. Here's one line (hopefully with best play) that put me off the Sveshnikov:

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e5 6. Ndb5 d6 7. Bg5 a6 8.
Na3 b5 9. Bxf6 gxf6 10. Nd5 f5 11. Bd3 Be6 12. O-O Bxd5 13. exd5 Ne7 14. c3 Bg7
15. Qh5 e4 16. Be2 O-O 17. Nc2 f4 18. Qg5 f5 19. Rfd1 f3 20. gxf3 Kh8 21. Kh1
Be5

But don't get me wrong, the Sveshnikov is a very good defense and I'd definitely prefer it to the likes of the Caro-Kann or even some French positions. It also has the added advantage of not being too variable based on computer use. It is, to me, more positional than tactical and so it's unlikely that your opponent will prepare a brilliant tactic that will just kill you if you don't know it. I think this is why some GMs like it so much and also why some fear playing the Najdorf or other sharper openings. Just look at Mexico 2007, it is almost all the most symmetrical classical openings against e4.