are there any variations of the Sicilian without much theory?
Sort:
Cali_boy613
Mar 7, 2017
0
#1
are there any variations of the Sicilian without much theory?
Mar 7, 2017
0
#2
Or which variations have the least theory is probably a better way to phrase my question
Mar 7, 2017
0
#3
I think the Nimzowitch (1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nf6) isn't so theoretical but I don't know what these people do after 2.Nc3/Ne2 keeping d4 as an option later and some of the time I think White can gambit a pawn...
There's the rare Lowenthal (1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cd 4.Nxd4 e5 5.Nb5 a6 6.Nd6+ Bxd6 7.Qxd6 Qf6/Qe7).
And I think the Grivas (1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cd 4.Nxd4 Qb6) but that might transpose into other stuff so I'm not really sure about it.
There is some discussion of this sort of issue in Starting Out: The Sicilian, 2nd Edition by John Emms (2009).
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627122350/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen123.pdf
no, because you must learn the antisicilians as everyone.
But if you wish open sicilians to surprise, no much theory, the Lowental ( as someone said back) and 1.e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Qb6!? (5000 games in database) or 4...d5!? ( 500 games) while the main lines are 30,000 , 40,000 or 90.000 games, this two sidelines are very interesting
The Taimanov seems to be a decent choice for what you're looking for - it isn't super sharp and doesn't involve boatloads in theory.
The Taimanov Sicilian is an Open Sicilian in which Black plays 2...e6 instead of 2...d6, exchanges the c-pawn for the d-pawn, then plays Nc6. Black usually continues with Qc7, a6, Nf6. Black sometimes plays the bishop to e7 and pins it to the knight at b4 if possible.
Black usually expands on the queenside (via pawns) and goes for a minority attack or goes for ...d4 (which is considered to be an equalizing move in many Sicilians).
However, in the Taimanov, your dark squares are weak. Thus, your dark squared bishop is crucial (similar to the Dragon), and losing it can lead to your doom.
"The Lazy Man's Sicilian" by Valeri Bronznik and Steve Giddins...
https://www.amazon.com/Lazy-Mans-Sicilian-Attack-Surprise/dp/905691605X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1488965033&sr=1-1&keywords=the+lazy+mans+sicilian
Publisher's blurb on Amazon:....
The Basman-Sale Variation is a relatively unexplored weapon for Black in the Sicilian Defence. After the perfectly normal moves 1.e4 c5, 2. Nf3 e6, 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Black lashes out with 4…Bc5! English IM Michael Basman and Croatian IM Srdjan Sale were the pioneers of this cunning chess opening system. The advantages are clear: it is surprising, aggressive and easy to learn. Compared to the complexity of mainstream Sicilian variations it requires little theoretical preparation, while you don't run excessive risks. That is why The Lazy Man's Sicilian is ideal for club players who don't have much time to study opening theory (or are not too fond of hard work anyway). This easily accessible and up-to-date book offers everything you need to get started with the Basman-Sale Variation. In well-organized chapters it describes the history and underlying ideas of the variation and explains the pawn-structures, the strategies and the tactical themes. What's more, if you play the Basman-Sale system, there is plenty of room for your own creativity as well!
the Snyder?
Mar 8, 2017
0
#9
Fenix613 wrote:
are there any variations of the Sicilian without much theory?
If you're playing Black, answering 1 e4 with 1...c5 condemns you to a lot of theory at some point, but if you keep in mind that you are basically launching a Q-side attack from move 1, that can guide you without knowing a lot of details since you're likely to make a move that takes a booked-up opponent out of the book relatively early.
For White, I've been looking at the 2 c3 (Alapin) Sicilian and having some luck in study games (various first several move variations forced, then me vs engines) against 1300-1800 chess engines. I'm now looking at the Closed Sicilian (1 e4 c5 2 Nc3, then 3 g3, 4 Bg2, 5 d3 and soon f4, where White grabs a lot of initial space but am not having a lot of luck with the early 6 f4, with which Spassky and Karpov had a lot of success. I'm now looking a 6 Be3 and maybe 7 Qd2 putting me in a solid position before launching an attack in the middle or K-side.
In any case, the crossroads comes after this position:
where Black doesn't always fianchetto his KB, resulting in a pawn at e6 or e5.
Even though, after O-O, the White K is partially unprotected after f4, it sure is tempting.
The Snyder variation of the Sicilian Defense. Here's a game in which White is a pretty decent player 
.
pfren wrote:
The Basman-Sale is virtually losing by force after 5.Nb5.
The authors cover that line extensively in the book. They do consider it one of White's sharpest and most dangerous replies, and caution that the second player must be well prepared in this variation. They do not indicate that Black loses by force....but s/he must be extremely careful in order not to end up in a worse, or even losing, postion against a better prepared opponent!
RussBell wrote:
pfren wrote:
The Basman-Sale is virtually losing by force after 5.Nb5.
The authors cover that line extensively in the book. They do consider it one of White's sharpest and most dangerous replies, and caution that the second player must be well prepared in this variation. They do not indicate that Black loses by force....but s/he must be extremely careful in order not to end up in a worse, or even losing, postion against a better prepared opponent!
And therefore it's not what the OP is looking for.
Neither is the Taimanov. Yes it's less theoretical than the Najdorf, but if your opponents play the English Attack, you had better know exactly what you're doing.
dpnorman wrote:
RussBell wrote:
pfren wrote:
The Basman-Sale is virtually losing by force after 5.Nb5.
The authors cover that line extensively in the book. They do consider it one of White's sharpest and most dangerous replies, and caution that the second player must be well prepared in this variation. They do not indicate that Black loses by force....but s/he must be extremely careful in order not to end up in a worse, or even losing, postion against a better prepared opponent!
And therefore it's not what the OP is looking for.
The theory of the Basman-Sale variation, as detailed in "The Lazy Man's Sicilian" is thorougly covered in a book of 221 pages. To my knowledge this is the only book that attempts to extensively cover the theory of this variation. It is doubtful that the theory of any other Sicilian variation is covered that succinctly (in a single book). Thus, the theory is minimal, relative to most other variations of the Sicilian. Which was what the OP was inquiring about. Whether one considers the variation to be a good one is another discussion entirely, but it certainly appears playable.
As far as the caveats on the 5.Nb5 variation, the authors caution that the variation is sharp and dangerous, and requires preparation on the part of the second player in order to not end up in a losing position. Let's see....are there any other mainstream openings/variations in chess where similar caveats apply.....
How about the O'Kelly? 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 a6
Mar 9, 2017
0
#15
Why hasn't anyone mentioned the Sicilian Kan yet? There's some theory, but if black doesn't follow theoretical lines precisely he/she will still have a playable position.
pfren wrote:
The Basman- Sale has been completely busted in correspondence chess some 10 years ago, yet the authors of the book fail to notice, or they are simply hiding things under the carpet.
This is their mainline, which is winning for white. They comment briefly 12...f6 without mentioning at all the crushing 13.Qd2!, as well as 12...Nf5, where they miss again the winning move 13.g4.
We all know that chess opening theory can change drastically over a 10 year period. The Bronznik-Giddins book was written in 2015 - less than 2 years ago. The game you cite and refer to as "their main line" was played in 1999. The game is not offered by the authors as "their main line" in the sense of representing best play by Black. Instead they examine it as an example of what was considered the main line play back in 1999, and is used in the book as an example of the kinds of difficulties Black can face if s/he were to embark on typically encountered lines of play in the 5.Nb5 variation. While the authors do indicate that lines following 5.Nb5 tend to be sharp and fraught with danger, and easily resulting in unfavorable positions for Black if s/he is not careful or is unprepared, they also offer suggestions for dealing with the difficulties. Nowhere do they suggest Black loses by force in the lines which they recommend. At the same time they do not contend that Black can easily do better than equality.
Admittedly, in the 12.e5 line of your analysis above the authors do not discuss the specific continuations after 12...f6 13.Qd2 or 12...Nf5 13.g4 which you bring up. I cannot speak to why they did not discuss these particular continuations. But the authors do recommend a couple of continuations for Black which avoid the 12.e5 line altogether, and which they contend represent probable improvements over the so-called "main line".
For example, after 5.Nb5 Qb6 6. Be3 Bxe3 7.fxe3 they suggest 7...Nc6 (instead of 7...Qxe3+) after which they say "Black takes the key squares d4 and e5 under control, so now the move 8.Qd4 is no longer possible". They then go on to examine a couple of other 8th moves by White, but conclude that "8.Qd2 is Stockfish's choice and probably the most dangerous", and that the ensuing play is not clear.
However, more interestingly, they examine a suggestion made by GM Matthew Sadler as an attempt to avoid the difficulties associated with the "main line" sequence following 5.Nb5 Qb6 6.Be3 - that being 6...Nf6.
I will not get into the weeds of the analysis after 6...Nf6. One can read the book for that. The point is that nowhere do the authors conclude that Black loses by force in what you call "their main line" in the 5.Nb5 variation.
And considering that they are reputable authors of many chess books, I feel that they would not put their reputations at risk by authoring a chess opening book on an opening which loses by force and, one would think, neither would the publishers.
As my original intent was not to endorse this particular book, but instead to respond to the OP's query regarding Sicilian variations with the least theory, I consider this horse to have been beaten to death. Therefore I will have no more to say on this topic.
This q made me laaaaaugh....
No. The Sicilian is the most analysed (alongside the Spanish Game) opening in chess. There is no Sicilian, apart from stupid losing lines, "without much theory." The reason it is so studied is that results show that it gives black the best winning chances against 1.e4
@18
For black: Hyperaccelerated Dragon 2...g6, Kalashnikov 2...Nc6 3 d4 cxd4 4 Nxd4 e5, O-Kelly 2...a6, Rubinstein 2...Nf6
For white: Closed 2 Nc3, Grand Prix 2 f4, Alapin 2 c3
