I've been playing the Sicilian Wing Gambit a lot recently. I know it's regarded as unsound and it isn't something that can really occupy more than a reserve slot in your repertoire, but I'm not keen on the Closed or Open Sicilian, and a lot of people are so unfamiliar with the SWG that they tend to dismiss it as "cute" or a novelty opening. I've won every single game I've played with it so far, even one where I blundered the opening and lost a rook to a queen check - I find that you either get quick queenside development out of it or it tends to lock Black into static attacks on your queenside while you quietly develop your kingside.
1. Ruy Lopez - gives black a more difficult time attaining equality than any other King-pawn opening
2. Queen's Gambit - if accepted, white gains plenty of of center space and can win back the gambit pawn; white gets slow, steady pressure with this opening
3. Vienna Game - allows for f4 without risking complications found in the King's Gambit
4. English Opening - good alternate if you want to play something different than d4 and e4, white usually fianchettoes on the kingside
Gambits are often unsound, King's and Evans exceptions, but are fun to play because of the open positions that result. With a gambit, one must try to win before the endgame.
Originally posted by StivesSometimes people get confused. For instance, when you look up the profile on Fischer at chessgames.com, you find that his openings for White include the Sicilian. But, strangely, that doesn't mean he played the Sicilian for White in his games. It means his opponent played the Sicilian and he responded, but they are actually both playing the Sicilian! LOL People - laymen - often do not realize that a chess game's opening title or name depends on both players and not just one. 🙂 LOL Hilarious. For instance, if I open 1.)e4 e5 2.)Nf3 Nf6 3.)Bc4! I am not playing the Giuoco Piano, because my opponent played Nf6 with Petroff's defense. Now, if it had gone like this: 1.)e4 e5 2.)Nf3 Nc6 3.)Bc4 Bc5 4.)c3 Nf6 then you have a Guioco Piano, because both played the common lines of the Opening on both sides. When an opening begins like the Guioco, like 1.)e4 e5 2.)Nf3 a6??? but then changes abruptly due to a strange move or even an orthodoxed move, we say they have transposed into another opening, whether orthodoxed or unorthodoxed. When it's out of book, they'll say unorthodoxed. Well, class is over. Enjoy your chess. LOL
Why do people keep calling the Sicilian a white opening? It's a black defence.
Originally posted by e4 effortI played the Danish Gambit against my computer, and I had it all tied up in bondage completely, one move shy of crushing it, and it somehow saw all the complications and tactical possibilities. Computers are great with tactical combinations. As Shamkovich wrote in Killer Chess Tactics, it's nearly impossible to pull a tactical combination over on a strong computer program. They calculate better. However, that passage of Killer Chess Tactics was beneath a game by Kramnik they annotated where he pulled off a beautiful combination against Deep Blue Junior. They said that shows how good he is, because computers at the high end like Deep Blue Junior don't usually fall for tactical combinations. They try to mess them up. You may get some of the icing out of the thought, but not all of it. You may win a piece, but you won't complete the combination . It will do something to mess up the whole thing, and hardly does not fall into a forced variation.
i often wonder how a chess computer programme would fare against a very strong player when forced to play a gambit opening such as a king's gambit or blackmar diemar gambit.