Answer the Big Question First

I discussed the Smith-Morra Gambit and other Anti-Sicilians in passing in previous posts. When deciding to play the Siclian, however, the most important question is: which main system will I employ?

I’m talking about how to answer the Open Sicilian (1.e4 c5 2.Nf3):

As you probably know, there is a huge array of options. Traditionally, they are grouped by black’s reply from the diagram: does s/he play 2…Nc6, 2…d6, or 2…e6?

Instead I’ll consider popular variations based on my opinions about they rank on two scales:

Aggressive — Neutral — Solid

and

Tactical — Neutral — Positional.

Of course, white has a hand in which line is played also, so these won’t be 100% accurate, but I’ll characterize some popular lines.

If you want an excellent overview of the Sicilian mainlines and Anti-Sicilian setups, get Mastering the Sicilian Defense by the late Danny Kopec (1954-2016). Kopec always shined as an author when discussing structural play in the opening and middlegame.

Okay, here we go:

Aggressive and Tactical

High risk, high reward! Probably the most aggressive line in the entire Sicilian universe is the Dragon Variation (1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 g6):

The “Dragon bishop” plans to breathe fire on the long a1-h8 diagonal. White’s most critical try, the Yugoslav Attack (6.Be3 Bg7 7.f3 Nc6 8.Qd2 0-0): 

When the first player will castle into an attack on the queenside, while starting one of their own on the kingside.

Despite this, I have never considered the Dragon super-tactical, because many of the sacrifices are standard and repeat themselves over and over again. Still, compared to other options, I will place it in this bucket.

Aggressive and Neutral

Najdorf Variation (1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6):

This may surprise some people, but I consider the Najdorf a blend of Tactical and Positional. Black doesn’t necessarily aim to attack the king, and often uses a “whole board” strategy. It is not as aggressive as the Dragon in a “kill the king” sense, but a positionally aggressive opening where black willingly takes on some risk. I learned how to play this opening from the first edition of The Sharpest Sicilian, one of the finest opening books I have ever read.

There are lines like the English Attack (6.Be3), but here white more or less forces black into a ferocious counterattack. Personally, 6.Bg5 annoys me the most: the late Ed Kopiecki shredded me with this a few years ago at the Marshall, in our only tournament encounter. RIP, Eddie.

Aggressive and Positional

Sveshnikov Variation (1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 6.Ndb5 d6):

Black seeks aggressive counterplay in this line, but the risks are more structural than anything else, with the potential outpost on d5. A knight ensconced here can be paralyzing. Still, neither side is too likely to get mated during a Sveshnikov battle, and the tactical play is relatively tame.

Neutral and Tactical

Taimanov Variation (1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6):

This is a dynamic, combative system with a large array of possible setups for both sides. Not only do both players need to be well-prepared and alert, some of the tactical motifs are strange. There are more solid lines a player can choose than the Taimanov, but more aggressive ones as well.

When I play 1.e4, it is my least favorite Sicilian to face because of its chameleon-like qualities. I should probably take a look at Emms’ book!

Neutral and Neutral

Scheveningen Variation (1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 d6):

I’ve given a traditional move order, but this exact position is now infrequent because of the strong Keres Attack (6.g4). Nowadays the Scheveningen is more often reached through the Najdorf: 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Be2 e6.

These positions are among the most balanced in the Sicilian, with something for everyone.

For more than a crash course on the Scheveningen, get Dynamics of Chess Strategy by Czech Grandmaster Vlastimil Jansa (trainer of David Navara). His comments on the Scheveningen, Ruy Lopez, and other lines is as good as you’ll find anywhere. Garry Kasparov, devoted Scheveningen player during his career, might also agree with Jansa’s recommendation against the Pirc as a “turkey shoot!”

Neutral and Positional

Kan Variation (1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 a6):

This branch of the Sicilian is much tamer than, for example, the Sveshnikov or Taimanov. There are more solid or positional alternatives, however. Black’s play is restrained, but not plodding. White has very different ways of answering this opening, from the space-eating Maroczy Bind (5.c4) to the solid 5.Nc3 to the more aggressive 5.Bd3 followed by Qg4.

Honestly, this is a Sicilian I don’t like for either side! Of course, your mileage may vary.

Solid and Tactical

Paulsen Variation (1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 d6 5.Nc3 e6):

We saw just how crazy this line could get in Shirov — Polgar! ‘Nuff said!

There is some overlap between the Kan, Paulsen, and Taimanov systems. I think of a Sicilian as a Paulsen when black develops the king knight from g8 to e7.

Solid and Neutral

Accelerated Dragon (1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 g6):

I’ll say it plainly: I don’t think the Accelerated Dragon is very good if white plays the Maroczy Bind (5.c4!) and doesn’t allow black to make a bunch of exchanges. I’ve never understood why this line is so popular in books/DVDs and with chess coaches. Can someone please explain it to me? Everytime I face it I feel like I’m shooting fish in a barrel.

Black has some tricks in non-Maroczy lines, but if white is prepared this defense will be a most welcome sight.

Solid and Positional

Classical Sicilian (1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 d6):

The polar opposite of the Dragon? I think so. Black hangs back and develops solidly, reacting to white’s ideas. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, if you’re the kind of player who likes to bait the opponent into overextending themselves.

The Classical has some distinct advantages. Like the Dragon, there is only one really challenging line against it, the Richter-Rauzer (6.Bg5). Unlike the Najdorf or Taimanov, in the Classical you pretty much know what’s coming if your opponent doesn’t play an Anti-Sicilian.

An aggressive player might opt for the Sozin Attack (6.Bc4) and a very aggressive opponent will head for the Velimirovic Attack (6.Bc4 e6 7.Be3 Be7 8.Qe2), but the prepared Classical player has nothing to fear in these lines.

Another benefit of the Classical is its flexible move order: black can play 2…d6 and 5…Nc6, or 2…Nc6 and 5…d6. That’s helpful when trying to get your preferred setup against Anti-Sicilians.

I hope this overview helps players considering playing the Sicilian for the first time or, maybe, a player considering a system change! Which Sicilian is best for you?

The post Which Sicilian is Best for You? | Chess Essentials appeared first on Chess Essentials.

In a round-robin event everyone plays each other, so a 10-player event would require 9 rounds. The most basic type of round-robin tournament is the quad.

A Swiss-system tournament could have 200 (or more) players in the same 9 rounds! The more complicated part is figuring out who plays who in each round.

Sections

There can be one section, or many sections to accomodate players of different ages or rating levels. Scholastic tournaments with three, four…even eight or more sections is common.

Every tournament has different criteria for a section. Rating-based sections might be as follows:

Open; Under 2000; Under 1600; Under 1200; Unrated

“Open” means open to all. A grandmaster could enter this section, and so could a new player without a rating. Typically, the players in this section will include everyone rated too high for the lower sections, plus lower-rated competitors who “play up.”

[Note: a section name like “Master,” “Premier,” or “International” typically means that only players rated 2000+ or 2200+ can play in it.]

The “Under” sections are open to anyone with a rating below the number given.

The “Unrated” section is open to players without an established rating (26 or more rated games).

Scholastic events often have names like “Novice,” “Primary,” “Reserve,” and “Championship.” The grade/rating requirements for these sections are varies from tournament to tournament, so read the descriptions carefully and talk to your child’s teacher or coach!

Pairings

I’m going to briefly explain “how the sausage is made.” Feel free to skip this part!

Homepage for Swiss-Sys tournament software, which I have used since 2003.

First, each section is independent from any other sections.

Within each section, the director sorts all the entries from highest-rated to lowest-rated.

The top half plays against the bottom half. So if a section has 20 players, the top half (by rating) is players 1-10 and the bottom half players 11-20. #1 plays #11, #2 plays #12 … #10 plays #20.

We randomly choose a color for player #1. All the odd numbered players get that color, while all the even numbered players get the opposite color.

Pretend Player 1 got white in Round 1. After the first round, suppose our results are like this (each player listed first had white):

Here are our standings after Round 1:

In Round 2, and all future rounds, we sort the 20 players first by score, then by rating. Within the 1-point group we again pair top half vs. bottom half as in Round 1, and do the same for the other score groups (½ and 0 point players). The result of this is that by the later rounds, similar scoring players will face each other, including the top contenders.

Swiss-system pairings try to answer the question “Who is the best player in this tournament?” without having everyone play each other.

Making correct pairings is usually messy. We need to avoid rematches, balance out colors, and alternate colors. So a player with white in one round would normally get black in the next round.

All of this makes pairing complicated, which is why it’s typically done by computer pairing programs nowadays. Still, a good tournament director will be able to explain a particular pairing to a player.

Pros and Cons of the Swiss-System Chess Tournament

Looking at our Round 1 pairings, you can already see the biggest problem with Swiss tournaments: lots of mismatches!

Early rounds of Swiss events tend to be non-competitive. I’ve directed plenty of tournaments where the higher-rated player wins every single game in the first round. Round 2 can be similar, and only by Round 3 do we see more balanced matchups.

Another problem for those seeking prizes (money, trophies, or otherwise) is that in a lot of Swiss tournaments, most players will not get a prize even if they have a good tournament. 3½ points out of 5 is probably not enough. Even 3 points out of 4 may not be enough.

On the plus side, a lower-rated player can gain lots of rating points with a couple of upsets. Young players who study hard can make a lot of hay playing in these events.

Of course, the biggest benefit is the large number of players who can fit into a Swiss-system chess tournament. With Swisses, the only limitation an organizer has for entries is the space of their venue.

The post The Swiss-System Chess Tournament appeared first on Chess Essentials.

The first few tournaments I competed in were a whirlwind of emotions, full of thrilling wins and devastating losses, but also a wealth of knowledge. Let’s read below “My First Chess Tournaments”:-

The Preparation: My First Chess Tournaments

The practice field was the talk of the town in the weeks leading up to the tournament. even more so, after each of our several games, Dad would analyze them, pointing out my mistakes and showing me strategic opportunities I had overlooked, which would greatly increase the intensity of our games.

As we explored the fundamentals of opening, I realized how critical it is to have solid center control and to work on developing my components. Looking beyond the squares to the wider picture, memorizing checkmating patterns, and solving online puzzles became my guiding principles.

The online chess arena Chess.com allowed me to pit my skills against those of chess grandmasters from all over the world. Conversely, it would be extremely difficult to replicate a real competition. As I prepared to confront an unfamiliar stranger, the incessant ticking of the clock served as a continual reminder that time was passing quickly, and fear consumed me.

The Venue: A World of Rooks and Pawns

People were moving throughout the arena. Chessboards were arranged in a precise fashion at each table, and the players seemed utterly engrossed in their game. The atmosphere was electric with expectation as anxious parents paced the sidelines. I saw a young man, probably a few years my senior, who seemed quite serious as I walked to my designated seat. We cautiously greeted each other as the only sound was the clack of the pieces being set up.

Game One: A Baptism by Blunder

The first game was characterized by nervousness and pawn misunderstanding, leading to a baptism by mistake. Because I was so set on sticking with the first ideas I had formulated, my anxiousness ultimately failed me. The game ended with a terrible thud because of a poor move that left my queen hanging. A quick checkmate sealed the deal. The weight of grief brought on by the loss weakened my newly-found confidence.

Between Rounds: Lessons Learned

A Lesson I Learned From Intervals I limp over to the “skittles” area, where players could review each other’s games and offer constructive criticism, feeling sad. A senior guy who appeared to be a chess expert saw my dip. He volunteered to review my game and discovered the mistake that lost me the match. The value of viewing setbacks as opportunities for growth is another value dad inculcated in me.

The Remaining Rounds: A Rollercoaster of Emotions

The subsequent games evoked a wide range of feelings. My experiences ranged from the thrill of a well-executed checkmate to the heartbreak of a narrow but avoidable loss and the contentment of an even draw. Despite my initial anxiety, I steadily improved with each subsequent round. I started to perceive the board as more than just a square grid; it was a potential terrain, a peaceful battlefield where tactics and plans fought.

Read More:- Chess Tactics Radjabov Naiditsch 2003

The Remaining Rounds: A Rollercoaster of Emotions

More important than any gold I could have won were the lessons I learned from competing in those initial competitions. I got addicted to chess for all the right reasons: the excitement of competing, the friendship I made with other players, and the never-ending quest to become better.

The Enduring Lessons

Going to chess tournaments was a fantastic way to learn the ropes, but it was only the beginning. I will always be grateful to them for the lessons they taught me:

• The Importance of Focus: In a time crunch when your opponent is hell-bent on winning, your ability to concentrate on the board and devise strategies becomes paramount. Possessing this skill is advantageous in numerous domains, including work, education, and even routine decision-making.
  
  
• Learning from Mistakes: With each obstacle came a chance to improve. By competing in tournaments, I realized the value of viewing setbacks as classroom opportunities.
  
  
• The Value of Sportsmanship: In spite of our disagreements, I never missed an opportunity to show my opponent how much I respected their game and their talent by shaking hands after each match.
  
  
• The Power of Perseverance: I learned to concentrate and persevere in the face of intense rivalry at chess events. It was inevitable that I would suffer defeat; but, I was determined to use those setbacks as fuel to improve for the following match.

The Journey Continues

Even after these many years since my tentative forays into competitive chess, the arrangement of black and white squares continues to captivate me. I still get a rush from competing, but I’m more captivated by the game because of its traditional beauty and strategic depth. Chess tournaments have transformed into communities for me, where I can meet other players, learn from their strategies, and generally improve my game.

The post My First Chess Tournaments appeared first on Chess Essentials.

The first event was held at the Hilton Garden Inn Midtown Park Avenue, organized by Keith Espinosa and IM Aleksandr Ostrovskiy.

The GM A section in action, with organizer Keith Espinosa looking on. Photo: Andre Harding

The Chief Arbiter and Tournament Director was … me!

Title norm tournaments are infrequent in New York City, as decent event space can be prohibitively expensive.

But what are norms?

First, all titles are awarded by FIDE, the International Chess Federation, and not the USCF or any other national federation. With that out of the way…

All you ever wanted to know about norms …

Norms are performance results needed for a title, specifically: Grandmaster (GM), International Master (IM), Woman Grandmaster (WGM), and Woman International Master (WIM).

[FIDE Master (FM), Candidate Master (CM), Woman FIDE Master (WFM), and Woman Candidate Master (WCM) do not require norms; only reaching a specified FIDE rating. Respectively: 2300, 2200, 2100, 2000.]

As I mentioned in my previous post on the FIDE Grand Swiss, players seeking GM/IM/WGM/WIM titles usually need three norms plus reaching a required rating threshold.

Rating and Performance Requirements for Norms GM: 2500 rating and three norms with a 2600+ performance.

IM: 2400 rating and three norms with a 2450+ performance.

WGM: 2300 rating and three norms with a 2400+ performance.

WIM: 2200 rating and three Norms with a 2250+ performance.

Yes, the requirements for “W” titles are all 200 points lower than their “non-W” counterparts, but women can and do earn the “Open” GM and IM titles.

So a player can score, say, a 2600-level performance in any event and earn a GM norm? Not so fast.

Other Requirements for Norms Number of games needed across events: At least 27.

Number of rounds per event: At least 9 (with few exceptions), but no more than 13 games will count (even if an event is longer than 13 rounds).

Titles of opponents: At least 1/3 must have the title you seek, or higher. In a 9 round event, a player seeking a GM norm must face at least 3 GMs. Also, at least 50% of opponents must hold (w)GM/(w)IM/(w)FM titles.

Minimum average rating of opponents: 2380 for GM, 2230 for IM, 2180 for WGM, 2030 for WIM. One player’s rating can be raised to 400 points below the required performance level. If an IM-norm seeker faces a 1900 player, they can consider it as if they played a 2050.

Federations of opponents: A maximum of 3/5 of the opponents may come from the applicant’s federation and a maximum of 2/3 of the opponents from one federation.

For a player from USA to earn a GM norm in a 9 round tournament held in the United States, they must face 5 or more titled players, including 3 GMs, and 4 of their 9 opponents must be from federations other than USA.

In a Swiss-System tournament, there’s no guarantee you will earn a norm even if you play well enough; your field may not meet all these conditions. In my years of directing, I’ve seen plenty of players miss out on norms simply because they faced three foreign players, instead of four.

Yeah. I hope you’re starting to see why norm events are often specially organized to ensure compliance with all these requirements!

Round Robin norm events

Round robins are the most reliable tournaments for title norms, because the tournament organizer can create a field that meets all FIDE requirements.

Such events normally have 10 players, meaning that each player plays one game against each of the other 9 players (9 rounds). For a GM norm event, at least three players will be GMs, given “conditions” (financial and/or other compensation) to participate. Four of the players need to play under a foreign federation.

The other players pay an entry fee to play and have a chance at a norm.

Round robins have an additional feature: since everyone knows in advance who they will play (and their rating), the Arbiter calculates how many points each norm-seeker requires to earn their norm. This is the amount of points that equate to a performance rating of, say, 2600 (for GM). There’s no guesswork during the event, or hoping for the necessary pairings.

If the average rating of a player’s opponents is 2600, they only need to score 4.5 points out of 9 for a 2600 performance (rare, but it can happen in super strong events like the Aeroflot Open).

If, at the other end, the average of a player’s opponents is the minimum 2380 … the GM-norm seeker needs to score 7 points out of 9, or “plus-five” (five more wins than losses)!

Back to the tournament!

We had three sections: GM A, GM B, and IM C.

GM A and GM B offered GM norms, as well as IM norms for players who did not already have the IM title. The IM C section offered IM norms only.

For all the details, see Chess Results. You can download all the games from the three tournaments, too!

The GM A section was very balanced, with just 129 rating points separating the top and bottom players, and this was reflected in the results. GM Titas Stremavicius (Lithuania) won the event with 6 points out of 9. To earn a GM norm, a seeker had to score 6.5 points.

Alex is once again on the cover of Chess Life!

The GM B section was quite different, headed by current U.S. Open Champion GM Aleksandr Lenderman (USA). He led the event from wire-to-wire and won with a dominant 7.5 points out of 9. Here, too, no norm-seeker achieved the required 6.5 points for a GM norm (or 4.5 points for an IM norm).

The IM C section was also won by the favorite, IM Zurab Javakhadze (Georgia), with a monstrous 8 points out of 9 (7 wins and 2 draws)! Zurab already has three GM norms, and just needs to cross 2500 FIDE to earn the GM title. After this event he’s 2484.

A norm was secured in this section, as FM Robert Shlyakhtenko (USA) earned his third and final IM norm. After this event, he’s very close to the needed 2400 FIDE rating as well.

What’s next?

Look for another norm event in January 2022 …

Stay tuned!

The post The 2021 New York Invitationals: Recap appeared first on Chess Essentials.

The post 10 Most Memorable Chess Matches of the 21st Century appeared first on Chess Essentials.

I can assure you of it without a doubt. The games played by the Sicilians and the French appear to be extremely different at first sight. On the other side, the French players will observe that their team’s strategy and mentality are quite comparable to the other team’s. If you’re new to the world of French dog aficionados, this article is a wonderful introduction to certain Sicilian breeds that have a “French-flavored” character. Let’s read below “Best Sicilian for French Player”:-

The Shared Ground: Strategic Ideas

Planning, piece mobility, and a solid pawn center are the strong suits of French players. The good news is that you can find many Sicilian variations that offer similar strategic landscapes. Remember these crucial points:

• Solid Pawn Structure: A powerful pawn structure, often including d5 and e6, is something the French are quite good at building. Two Sicilian variations that illustrate this strategy are the Kan Variation (1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4) and the Taimanov Variation (1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. Nc3). Both versions feature intricate middlegames, where Black fights for control of the board and the ability to move pieces around.
• Kingside Pressure:  French chess players often want to push the kingside by shattering pawns and shifting pieces. The Scheveningen Variation begins with the move e4 c5. Here we see it in action with the following move sequence: 2. Nf3 e6. Fifth, with c3 and qe7 Nxd4 Nc6 6. d4 cxd4 4. Be2). 6. Black turns the bishop on dark square into a fianchetto to try to weaken the pawn on d5 and put pressure on the white king.
• Prophylactic Measures: The French players are well cognizant of the importance of prevention and make every effort to steer clear of potential problems. Openings like the Sveshnikov Variation are part of this category. By ceding a pawn, Black can create openings for potential attacks and exert pressure on White’s center.

Best Sicilian for French Player

With the usual tactics in mind, we can have a look at the Sicilian variations that the French player enjoys:

• The Kan Variation: The Kan Variation is an example of such a variant; it lays the framework for both the present and the far future. It is my firm belief that this is an excellent jumping off point for French players who are interested in giving Sicilian a try without committing fully.
• The Taimanov Variation: Compared to the mellower Kan, the Taimanov has a firm foundation with a bit more bite. A common tactic for black is to fianche to the light-squared bishop in an effort to impede kingside activity.
• The Scheveningen Variation: The Scheveningen variant includes more options than the Kan and Taimanov variants when it comes to approaches. Black might find himself in intriguing and potentially perilous positions through kingside play and the pawn break on d5. However, one must have a stronger understanding of tactical sequencing.
• The Sveshnikov Variation: An alternative to Sveshnikov that increases the stakes is the Sveshnikov Variation. The pawn sacrifice escalates the power struggle between the two factions. Despite how challenging it is, the Sveshnikov is a great strategy for aggressive players.

Read More:- Chess Tactics Radjabov Naiditsch 2003

Learning Resources and Tips

“The New Variation” for the aim of researching positional concepts in relation to Sicily and France.

• ” The Sicilian Defence” by Joe Gallagher gives a simple overview of the prologue.
• Several sources may offer chess video lessons covering various Sicilian variants. You should listen to the music of two Sicilian seasoned guitarists, Matthew Sadler and Simon Williams.
• Websites such as Chessable and Lichess allow you to analyze the games of top players in the Sicilian variation that you prefer.
• Do not try to become an expert in everything; first, be sure you understand what you do know. Mastering just one Sicilian variation should be your primary goal.
• There are several benefits to playing practice matches against real people, including: improving your skills via practice, discovering games with tags, overcoming tactical obstacles based on your selected kind, and, most importantly, taking part in practice matches.

Conclusion: A Sicilian Adventure for the French Player

The Sicilian Defense is an excellent foundational opening for French players seeking to broaden their repertoire. By picking a version that fits their play style and using well-known strategic notions, French fans can relax into the Sicilian’s dynamic realm. The learning curve may be steep in comparison to French, but the payback is substantial.

In Sicilian territory, the fearless French player will find stronger positions, more strategic alternatives, and superior chess theory knowledge. Also, keep in mind that the travel is entertaining all by itself. Immerse yourself in the Sicilian’s complexities and savor the thrill of combat to reach new levels of chess expertise. I hope you like reading “Best Sicilian for French Player”.

The post Best Sicilian for French Player appeared first on Chess Essentials.

Understanding the Sicilian Landscape

Countering White’s 1.e4 c5 Sicilian Defense, the adversary seeks to undermine White’s command structure. After surrendering a pawn, Black obtains dynamic piece play and is prepared to launch an attack from the kingside. Your middlegame and overall plan will be completely upended when the Sicilian quickly branches out. Here are the main road intersections:

Open vs. Closed Sicilian:

Once 1.e4 c5, 2.Nf3 are played, Black has the option of play either the Open Sicilian (2…e6) or the Closed Sicilian (2…d6). Contrasted with the Open Sicilian, which promotes more exact and tactical positioning, the Closed Sicilian allows for more strategic and positional disagreements.

Within the Open Sicilian:

Here, Black has a plethora of options after 2…e6:

• The Kan Variation (1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 a6): Because of its moderate tone and obvious progression, the Kan is ideal for beginners. As opposed to more acute varieties, this one requires less theoretical knowledge.
• The Taimanov Variation (1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.b3): The Taimanov, like the Kan, values planning ahead and using pieces effectively. In most cases, complex yet balanced middlegames are the result.
  
• The Najdorf Variation (1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 Nc6): According to both experienced players and newcomers to the game. So, despite their precarious positions, both sides are faced with thrilling tactical dilemmas.
• The Dragon Variation (1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 g7): To quickly advance to the kingside and launch a savage attack, Black gives up a piece.

Choosing Your Sicilian Weapon

The second thing we’ll talk about is how to pick the Sicilian version that suits your game the most:

1. The Aggressive Player:

• Najdorf Variation: If you thrive in close-quarters tactical battles and can commit complex theoretical concepts to memory with ease, the Najdorf is an excellent weapon for you. Acquiring this skill is crucial for reaching one’s maximum potential.
• Dragon Variation: The Dragon variant, similar to the Najdorf, promotes aggressive play and attacks on the kingside. Always be prepared for the possibility of an uneven surface or other hazards.

2. The Positional Player:

• Kan Variation: This version is perfect for you if careful planning and precise positioning are important to you. There will be chances to think and prepare ahead in the middlegames that follow.
• Taimanov Variation: The well-structured checkerboard of the Taimanov variant, similar to that of the Kan, encourages daring piece play and smart positioning.

3. The Beginner:

Repetition by Kan: With its straightforward theory and easy-to-learn basics, the Kan Variation is an excellent choice for Sicilian novices.

Which Sicilian is Right for You

The Sicilian variation you play depends on your natural chess style. On occasion, aggressive players would employ the Dragon or the Najdorf, two kingside attacks that are both imbalanced and sharp. Positional players often go for the strong Kan or Taimanov while formulating their plans.

Those who are unfamiliar with the Kan should begin by reviewing its essentials. Consider the study habits of your opponent as well. For detailed information on each variation, chess websites are an excellent resource.

Additional Considerations:

• Your Opponent’s Style: When faced with stubborn foes, you have two terrifying options: the Najdorf and the Dragon. If your adversaries like to engage in positional warfare, the Kan and the Taimanov are two formidable options to consider.
• Your Time Commitment:  It takes a lot of time and effort to become proficient at challenging variations, such as the Najdorf. If you’re limited on study time, Kan or Taimanov are two possibilities to consider.
• Explore Further: Here is an article to get you started with your research. With each new version comes a plethora of subplots and subtle tactical changes. To learn more advanced strategies, you should look for chess books and websites online.

Conclusion

As a result of the Sicilian Defense’s adaptability to different playing styles, black players have a lot of options. To reach your chess potential, you must discover your optimal Sicilian variation. No matter what happens, studying Sicilian is a gratifying experience in and of itself. Make a weapon choice and run through several drills before your Sicilian adventure.
I hope you like reading “Which Sicilian is Right for You”.

The post Which Sicilian is Right for You appeared first on Chess Essentials.

A player who re-enters a tournament has to pay another entry fee; some tournaments offer re-entered players a discount for their return.

(See the glossary for definitions of more chess terms.)

A re-entered player cannot play someone they faced “in their first life,” unless that opponent has also re-entered. Then, the “re-incarnated” entities can play!

Most tournaments do not allow re-entries, and scholastic tournaments almost never do, but it is something to be aware of.

Are Re-Entries Fair?

I think just about any tournament policy is fair if it is announced in advance in all publicity. It is the responsibility of the player to understand the rules of a competition, and to ask questions of the Organizer or Tournament Director if they are unsure about something.

The Organizer is responsible for ensuring good playing conditions; the Tournament Director is responsible for applying the regulations of the competition correctly and fairly.

Sometimes a re-entered player will win a prize, and this can upset some players. Anecdotally, the re-entry doesn’t change the player’s fortunes and they just increase the prize fund for players in good form.

The post Re-Entries: Fair or Not Fair? appeared first on Chess Essentials.

Draw claims are a lot easier with digital clocks, which unfortunately means beautiful clocks like the Garde are less common. Photo: Caissa Chess Store

Still, knowing how to properly claim a draw is important for a tournament player in two main instances:

• The 50-move rule
• Triple occurrence of position

Note that this is different from offering your opponent a draw — I’ll cover that in a future post.

Draw claims don’t involve the opponent. You call over the Arbiter or Tournament Director, who then makes a ruling.

You can only claim a draw on your turn, with two possibilities: the key position has already appeared, or your next move would bring it about.

The 50-move rule

If 50 consecutive moves (by white and black) have been made without a pawn move or a capture, a player having the move can claim a draw.

50 consecutive moves have already been played without a pawn move or capture.

To claim a draw: Pause the clock, call the Arbiter, and state your claim.

The post How to Claim a Draw in Chess appeared first on Chess Essentials.

Kids have been taking over chess for a long time now. This is great for the game in the long term, but what about the adults who have to face these youths in tournaments?

A kid or teenager is usually still improving; if an adult is getting better, it’s typically at a slower rate. I’ve never been convinced that this is because of “younger vs. older brains.” Older players simply have more life responsibilities which require focus and energy that cannot be spent on chess.

Given two players of the same rating facing off, I would bet on the younger player in the absence of other information.

All is not lost, however.

Understand Your Adversary

I have played in many quads over the years where all of my opponents were kids or teens rated similarly to me, that is, in the 2000-2100 range. Bearing in mind everyone has a different style, here are some things I learned:

Home prep can make a huge difference

Kids stick to their openings and either don’t suspect or don’t respect prepared variations.

Research! If you know what openings your rival plays, do some pre-tournament work and find wrinkles to set them challenges. You can really make hay if you regularly face the same set of opponents and can develop a game plan against them.

Also, especially in Swiss tournaments, remember to go for a walk early in your rounds to see what potential opponents are playing. On a related note …

Put your thinking cap on

In one event, I noticed in the first two rounds that a player I was due to meet in the final round displayed impressive middlegame and endgame play, both tactical and strategic. His openings were quite refined as well. I asked myself: “Why is he under 2100 and not 2200+?”

I concluded the reason was likely psychological. Probably, he gets nervous and doesn’t handle pressure on par with other players of his rating class.

When we faced off, he got a definite advantage with the White pieces, though Black has some counterplay:

Trusting my scouting report, I played 21…Nd5 confidently and … offered him a draw!

Mind you, the clock wasn’t an issue for either of us.

He started to think … and think … and think. He began turning red and looked ill.

Soon he did what I expected, and agreed to the draw. I could tell he knew he shouldn’t do it, but he didn’t have the stomach to play on. I understood his emotions, because I’ve been there!

Target their Weaknesses

I faced one Expert kid five times. I lost the first game, drew the second from a much better position, and then won the last three encounters!

What happened?

In the first game I went for a slow, maneuvering Chigorin Ruy Lopez as Black, with the idea that young players are generally more comfortable with livelier positions. I was outplayed and lost the game, but I got to watch some of his other games in that event and others before we met again.

In our second game I went for a kingside attack, after observing that he didn’t handle direct attacks very well. I had great winning chances, but couldn’t crash through and drew.

After seeing more of my adversary’s games, I was able to prepare effectively for the final three battles and went for aggressive play. Our fourth game began with the sequence 1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 e5 (I knew he played this line) and now 4.Nf3 Nbd7 5.g4!? which had been popularized by Alexei Shirov.

I won in 17 moves.

I’m not a great attacker, but judged that he was an even worse defender.

Don’t be a Hero

Conversely, another Expert I often faced became my angstgegner. This was in large part because I was stubborn and kept trying — and failing — to refute his opening. But at a certain point, I felt I was doomed against him no matter what I did, and it affected my play. The final tally: one win, one draw, and four losses.

The bottom line: learn as much as you can about your young opponents’ playing style, openings, and likes/dislikes. Prepare well, establish a blueprint for your games in advance when possible, and trust your skills!

Good luck!

The post How to Defeat Kids in Chess Tournaments appeared first on Chess Essentials.