08 Dec 05
1 edit
Originally posted by Darth Sponge1. e4 c5 2. a3 g6 3. b4 (otherwise a3 was useless) Bg7 4. Nc3 b6
one reccomendation I found on the Wing gambit is to play 2. a3 to set it up... not so much a gambit anymore. how much does that help?
are there any GMs playing the Smith-Morra? everything I just read (just skimmed a few sites) said "good at club level, never played by GMs" which is fine for me at my level, but just to get a grip on the issue- is it just lacking in theory and avoided by GMs?
Black now has the advantage. It's horrible.
I have 2. d4 played maybe 40 or 50 times for draws or white wins between two 2300+ players in the last 5 years. So not common but not unheard of.
08 Dec 05
Originally posted by no1marauderThe only down side to playing a Bb5 line is what to do against 2... e6 (by playing this move order, Black avoids all these vegetarian moves!)
That's more of a drawish line, but I've had problems getting wins against that as Black, also..
08 Dec 05
1 edit
Originally posted by buddy2I disagree that the Smith-Morra is an "off the wall" variation; did you look at the link with analysis I provided? I use books and databases religiously here and I have 4 losses to the SM on RHP and I should have lost at least one more but for a blunder by Ragnorak in a superior position. You give up the pawn, but you get fast development and open lines of attack particulary against Black's d-pawn. The poster wanted something that avoids well-analyzed main lines; I think the SM is a good line for that.
Play a solid line with white. Playing the Smith Morra or Wing Gambit or other off the wall variations might get you somewhere otb, but will get you nowhere against anyone with a book or database.
08 Dec 05
Originally posted by no1marauderDid I? Game 886838
I should have lost at least one more but for a blunder by Ragnorak in a superior position.
The SM often results in a fun game. I play it a lot against lower rated players, and the odd time against similar rated players. Why? Because lower rated players normally don't use databases. Not knowing it, and not knowing databases can be disastrous as demonstrated by my first encounter with it...Game 773592. While playing it, i normally reference that page that 2Bit just linked to...http://www.insight.demon.co.uk/Technical_Articles/beatingsicillian/sicillian_beating.htm
GauravV declined the gambit with some form of Alapin, but set himself up for the classic bishop sacrifice, resulting in my first win against a 2000+. 🙂 Game 1514982
I'd recommend giving it a go. There is only 1 real trap, and once you're wary of that, it can lead to good solid games.
D
08 Dec 05
Originally posted by RagnorakThat was my recollection; I'll look through my game analysis. I thought I didn't get sufficient compensation for the Queen although that was a database line.
Did I? Game 886838
The SM often results in a fun game. I play it a lot against lower rated players, and the odd time against similar rated players. Why? Because lower rated players normally don't use databases. Not knowing it, and not knowing databases can be disastrous as demonstrated by my first encounter with it...Game 773592. While ...[text shortened]... There is only 1 real trap, and once you're wary of that, it can lead to good solid games.
D
08 Dec 05
Originally posted by RagnorakLooking at the game, Fritz has it pretty even (within 1.00 pawn) most of the way until you start making some mistakes late. Materially wise I got a Rook, Knight and 2 pawns for the Queen which is supposed to be slightly in my favor, but I thought you had the advantage as your pieces were better developed and you controlled most of the board. So I guess my recollection that I should have lost isn't entirely correct; there was a lot of play for both sides. Nonetheless, it was certainly an interesting and lively game and certainly out of most Sicilian "books".
Did I? Game 886838
The SM often results in a fun game. I play it a lot against lower rated players, and the odd time against similar rated players. Why? Because lower rated players normally don't use databases. Not knowing it, and not knowing databases can be disastrous as demonstrated by my first encounter with it...Game 773592. While ...[text shortened]... There is only 1 real trap, and once you're wary of that, it can lead to good solid games.
D
08 Dec 05
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderI thought I'd at the very least mess up your pawn structure, but the way you worked the exchange left your pawns and over all position very strong.
Looking at the game, Fritz has it pretty even (within 1.00 pawn) most of the way until you start making some mistakes late. Materially wise I got a Rook, Knight and 2 pawns for the Queen which is supposed to be slightly in my favor, but I thought you had the advantage as your pieces were better developed and you controlled most of the board. So I guess m ...[text shortened]... s, it was certainly an interesting and lively game and certainly out of most Sicilian "books".
It was a fun game, with a lot of seemingly non-moves (especially by my bishops) trying to discover some kind of weakness in your defence, but in fairness, you defended it well. I can remember cursing your knight on more than 1 occasion.
I'm curious, which moves did it say were mistakes? [EDIT] Now that I look at it again, getting my queen stuck out of the game on the edge was obviously a mistake.
D
08 Dec 05
Of course, you can play anything at up to, say 1800 level, but above that the SM had diminishing returns. If you look on any database, going into the SM increases black's winning percentages quite a bit. And your opponent doesn't have to take the c pawn. He could just develop the N to f3 (as I do) and have a statistically superior game. In most databases you can find upwards of a thousand master games, and there is no dearth of analysis out there. Yea, if you're just putzing around enjoying yourself, why not? Personally, I enjoy a dull winning game more than an exciting loss. If you can get an exciting win, so much the better!