DenVerdsligeRejsende wrote on 02/16/15 at 04:21:12:
With respect to the Morra Gambit, I think that the principled approach is simply to just take the pawn, but psychologically I think that it might annoy the opponent to transpose to 2. c3, like said above.
Yeah, it's a tough decision. Black is probably at best equal both ways - one has the psychological advantage of taking your opponent out of his preferred paths, but has the disadvantage that it's slightly more difficult to play for more. A lot of times I base my decision to take or not on whether or not I think my opponent has prepared a lot or not. In internet blitz games I almost always take it, especially against lower rated players, while against a strong opponent OTB I would likely decline it to avoid extensive preparation and lower my risk.
DenVerdsligeRejsende wrote on 02/16/15 at 04:21:12:
Like mentioned in the introduction, about starting with Sweshnikow Sicilian with 5...e5, I used to play this, I even played this in a FIDE international event twice, but it honestly is quite scary at times with the king just sitting with all of the pawns up there (and two are doubled).
Yes - it's funny that both Shabalov and I started the opposite way. After I met him at a few lectures/simuls in my hometown I took up the Kalashnikov, using the Pinski/Aagaard, Silman, and McDonald books as my guide, and later switched to the Sveshnikov when it became a bit more popular and when
The Easiest Sicilian was published. But just as Shabalov mentioned, with the rise of 11.c4 (even if Black is fine there), I'd prefer to play the Kalashnikov for more than one reason.
DenVerdsligeRejsende wrote on 02/16/15 at 04:21:12:
Maybe switching from the Sweshnikow to the Kalashnikow is like how some switch from the main line Semi-Slaw to the Classical Slaw.
Not a bad analogy at all.