Nothing, nothing, has too much theory when you're a weak player. This is one huge reason that I recommend main'ish lines to students. It's so much easier to learn real openings at a basic level and then slowly learn more as your overall ability increases than to try to switch to real openings after you're decent.

Also you should be freaking thrilled when someone plays the SM against you.

wat?

http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=6725

this is hilarious on so many levels.

haha yes

OK, so you sack a pawn in the opening, but the plan is simple...watch this video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ycv-BEVvumE

Here are his games in action:

http://www.youtube.com/results?searc...her+morra&aq=f

You don't always get a quick win, but you do get initiative, and often great middlegame battles.

I guess learning the mainline sicilian might be ok if you're really up for it

Why is that hilarious?

Sounds reasonable

at least:

a) 25:1 is hilariously bad (or printing money for will hill, whichever way you want to look at it)
b) "He spends a large proportion of his free time on chess one way or another, but for the most part not on systematic study or serious games, but rather on one-minute games and following the top international tournaments online"
c) "and without losing his girlfriend (who has not the slightest interest in chess)"
d) The article is pretty awful all over, especially the part with blathering about ratings (stating strange "facts", confusingly switching between ELO and BCF) . I personally think of Steve Giddins as the Schiller of Chessbase, so I suspect he wrote it. edit: Or maybe the dude wrote it himself? At least one part of the article states "To motivate himself he has wagered £200 with William Hill at odds of 25:1 on me becoming a grandmaster, and so stands to win £5,000 should he succeed."

Look, I've studied this opening years ago and have even played it. But it doesn't matter. I wasn't disagreeing with anything you wrote in the post I'm quoting now. However, I think it's very wrong to claim that most players prefer white unless you're polling only weaker players. It seems to me that you just made up that point in order to sell the opening.

Yeah well obviously... I'm no GM and the guy who asked for advice is rated about ~1500, and at this level, white probably has a good record for the Morra-Smith. Even at higher levels it is used as white successfully. But the point is that the plans are simple and easy to play and learn and that's what this guy wants- somehting will not too much theory, but with loads of dynamism and initiative. The sicilian is fine if he's willing to spend time learning all the variations, but that's what the mainline sicilian is- heap loads of theory.

Well, actually I might be wrong, but that's how I view the mainline sicilian. When I was younger, at my old school we had group lessons from a GM who taught us the closed sicilian line 1. e4 c5 2. f4, and it was just heaps and heaps of theory, and it put me off for a while. I prefer e4 c5 Nf3, but I don't feel as confident when playing it compared to playing the morra-smith

a couple things:

I think you are right that Morra-Smith is perfectly fine opening for a bit lower rated players. I would say that up to like ~1800-1900 level if White has good knowledge of Morra they would probably be scoring really well, as it is not easy to play for black if they don't know what to do. However, at a big higher level Morra is definitely just not good for White, because as long as Black knows a couple lines they are at least = and most often =+ with some tiny compensation.. The simplest setup IMO is just e6, a6, Qc7, Nc6, Nf6, and then it depends on white's play, might be Ng4 followed by Bc5 (as long as white doesn't miss the good old Nd4 trick) or even Be7 and d6, or Bc5 and d6 without Ng4, all of them are followed by 0-0, b5 and Bb7, in all of which White is just a pawn down for a little bit of compensation, in other words its balancing between =+ and worse for white.

I appreciate what Kingcrusher is (was) doing and respect that, but I mean at least for this video he chooses the most passive setup for black possible and then states that gambit is perfectly good for white, you just cannot do that..

And lastly, 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 has probably 20x more theory than 1. e4 c5 2. f4

a couple things:
Yeah, the passivity of black's setup is what often loses him the game. And at our level, people suck at defending/being passive whn there is a sound attack going on. I'm not saying it's a flawless opening, but I'm saying that at our level and slightly higher, you should achieve good results with it.

Yes, that's true, but he's just giving examples for white's plans and giving black "null moves" or whatever. He plays quite a lot of blitz games which he's posted on youtube, and drew with an IM in 1 game. I don't know his overall results in the MS, but the point is that he gets interesting, dynamic, open games. And sometimes he screws up, but that's standard for humans, especially under time pressure in blitz. But in those blitz games, out of the openings, I would usually rather be playing with the white pieces. And at my level, games are seldom decided by a pawn out of the opening. You have to realize that...

I know this, the open sicilian is the most frequently played opening, right?

I agree. Gambit openings are very good at <1800 level. When I was 1600-1800 I played openings like 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5 (as Black) crushing opponents of my own level. Obviously this opening is totally incorrect but it gives Black some kind of initiative which is sufficient to beat a poorly defending player.

<2100, even long games, imo.

got rybka4 in the mail yesterday. its not deep but neither is your mom. should be fun and informative
edit. it is fun

Does it have a new opening book?

I've got Rybka 3 and I'm not sure why I'd want Rybka 4 unless I want to watch it make even more ridiculously crushing moves against me.

But maybe it has more opening innovations like R3 had. Still, I'm not sure I'd be interested unless I reach like 2000+.

this is my first time owning rybka so i cant compare it to rybka3. will need to get back to u on the opening book, because i havent figured out yet how to explore its openings etc. its a big software so its not easy to just install and know all the intrecacies of it.

I find it pretty lightweight tbh. Much simpler and intuitive than any other software I've tried.

im having trouble with the database where i cannot filter games. For example if i want to see all the magnus carlsen games the program will briefly indicate that it is gathering all the info, but then the queue is left blank.

Be really careful how you type in the name. The program can be super nitty. Have you tried just the last name, capitalizing the first letter? Do you see a list of his games getting generated as the program searches?

thx works like a charm now. still learning about this awesome software

Shirov Carlsen 175 move marathon draw :x

well hello there

Hahaha )) I will let her know that she now has a new fan on 2+2 chess subforum lol

well hello there x 2

Let her know, 2 new fans.