This nameless line is highly effective against the Sicilian Defense

I'm a Gambit Morra player, tired of always having to play precisely to avoid falling into a worse position.

Also, Black can always avoid the Morra Gambit Accepted and transpose into the boring Alapin. For a while, I was experimenting with the move 1 e4 c5 2 b3 (the Snyder Variation of the Sicilian), which is quite interesting but doesn't fully convince me.

Finally, I found the move Qxd4 followed by Qd3!?. The good thing is that this line doesn't even have a name, and I know Shimanov was played against Carlsen, and he was actually defeated with it. I've been diving deeper into the variation, and it really deserves a look. If Black isn't well-prepared, they could end up getting a good lesson.

Checkhover variation is in the spirit too but only It works against 2 ...d6

my líne is more simple , Qxd4 and then Qd3 or Qa4 or Qe3 or Qc4 , I feel Qd3 make more sensei but some players prefer Qa4

If white moves the queen to e3 instead of d3, it would resemble a variation that Carlsen has played and informally called the Ukrainian Sicilian. There is a chance that Qd3 played here is a recommendation in one of Levy Rozman's Gotham Chess courses. The problem black has is that the some of the variations are rather unnatural for a person to play. The opening explorer on chess.com will give some move options.

These lines can be reached via a closed Sicilian move order with 2. Nc3.

You just have to check the statistics in the Lichess database to see that Qd3 is winning 52% of games with White and losing 41% at high levels where I play (2200-2500).

This is much better than any Open Sicilian or closed , where White has worse win percentages.

This can't be better then open sicilian.

Cmon guys, do You really honestly belive it is better to have the Queen on d4 rather then the Knight? Developing her as a first piece? To where she can be imediatelly attacked? To move her again to d3 where she blocks the bishop?

The point of open sicilian is to trade long term chances in form of better pawn structure for short term chances in form of spatial adventage and lead in development. In Your proposed variation White does the same, but imediatelly tosses out lead in development by allowing Black to win a tempo against the Queen.

You’re cheating. Every time you advance in a line, the percentages for White can go up, but in the first 4 moves, I’m showing you that the best opening against the Sicilian is this unnamed Qd3 variation. It’s neither the open nor the closed Sicilian. Its this amazing line.

There’s no argument here.

Only patzers respond in this thread . I challenge you patzers to a match with this opening.

If you want, we can look at lines, I have no problem because I’ve done some analysis on it and you’ll see that it’s very interesting, but you haven’t even bothered to study it for a while like I have, so you’re talking without knowing anything.

Also, in your first comment, you criticize the Morra. Dare to play the Morra against Marc Essermann, like Van Wely did in a slow game, and he got crushed.

What you said in your first comment, that all Sicilian players know something good against the Morra, is totally false.

I’ve stopped playing the Morra because you have to memorize a lot of lines, and I don’t like playing such theoretical chess, but the Morra is very playable against high-level players, and if you have a great memory, the Morra is still a deadly weapon.

To reach moves 8-10 as you say, you need many of your opponents to play the theoretical line you want them to, because you know it by heart

In an ideal world, that would be wonderful and you'd almost always win with your line.

This is what happens to many experts in the Dragon variation, for example, who eagerly wait for their opponent to play the theoretical lines they always know better than you because they've studied up to move 25 or 30

But the reality is that in most games you play, you won’t reach the position you're interested in after moves 8-10.

Instead, by move 4, with my Qd3 line, you almost always reach the same variations because the Black player, not knowing the theory, tends to play the most logical moves a human would, and that's where they get trapped in your web.

That's why I say, don’t cheat by saying that after move 10 there are openings with better percentages than Qd3.

Anyone who has analyzed a database knows that

it's common sense man

If White plays the correct moves, the win percentage usually increases.

What’s interesting are the openings where, by move 3, 4, or 5, White already has a 52 or 55% win rate.

Let me give you another example.

In the Caro-Kann opening, after 1 e4 c6 2 Nc3 d5, White has better results in high levels (2200-2500) with

3 Qe2 (57% win rate) and with 3 Qf3 (the Goldman variation, which I love to play).

However, as you can see, most people play 3 d4 and 3 Nf3 here, which are considered by opening theory to be the best options for White, but in practical chess and especially in blitz, these unconventional lines are more profitable and effective than what most players do

In the Checkhover variation, Black does not automatically play Nc6 (they only play it 40% of the time), whereas in my Qd3 line, it is played 89% of the time.

Either way, it leads to the same thing because sooner or later, Black has to play Nc6 to push the queen out of the center of the board, so in the end, it transposes to the same position.

With 1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 e6 3 d4, it also transposes to my line, I think.

If you're going to play 2 Nf3 first, it's more efficient to play 2 d4 first.

I’m going to show you an opening trap that explains why it’s worth starting with 2 d4 instead of 2 Nf3

In online blitz, many times our opponent premoves the move 2 .. d6.

But

the main reason why it's preferable to play 2 d4 is to avoid the move

1. e4 c5 2 Nf3 Nc6, where we will never be able to play Qxd4.

I replied to you in the previous message I edited

the main reason why it's preferable to play 2. d4 is to avoid the move 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6, where we will never be able to play Qxd4.

this seems interesting I might try it.

bro, it's Bb5 that's brilliant not b4

It's not true, the Wing Gambit only scores 47% with White and 47% with Black, according to the huge Lichess database at higher levels (2200-2500 and above).

You might be referring to the Portsmouth Gambit, which is a line in move 3 that scores 53% for White after b4 if Black plays Nc6, but Black can play the good 3 . . e5! if they know it, and that line is no longer as good. 1 e4 c5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 b4 e5!

You’re right, but the key to b4 is that you have to remember it, just like Nd5, because then it’s easy to discover Bb5 once you reach the desired position.

If you're going to play the Wing Gambit, it makes sense to play it on move 2.

I studied it back in the day, and I wasn't convinced by it, nor did I have much success with it, unlike with the Morra, which has given me a good win percentage.

Even so, if your idea is to play the Checkhover variation and your opponent plays Nc6, then you can memorize that b4 you propose, but again, I'll tell you, there's a critical line which is e5!

That critical line, I really don’t like with White.

Just for that reason, I wouldn’t play the Portsmouth Gambit because Black can "refute" it in practice.

I'm not a lazy player, I simply have a practical approach.

You can't say I'm a lazy player if I study my lines and have delved deeper into them than anyone else.

If your method works for you, that's fine, but mine has given me good results.

This is how I reached 2150 FIDE, no one helped me, I've always been a self-taught person, studying games from grandmasters and, yes, thanks to the analysis engines.

I look for unconventional lines that my opponent hasn't studied or played much, and if someone has memorized something up to move 15 or 20, it will be me, never my opponent.

But yes, I’ve always liked memorizing lines, although it’s not my specialty, at least memorizing my lines that almost no one knows

anyway everyone has their own way.

that line about u2400 is an atrocious lie. That may have been true ages ago when the refutation of a lot of lines was not always well known, but now even at 2200 level people are preparing deeply agaisnt you in tournament play with computer lines. 
just to give you an example, i won the expert section in a mid sized tournament this weekend, and even the 2000 rated players, prepped 12+ move computer lines agaisnt me. IF i didnt know the theory of my openings as deep as i did i would be in trouble. This idea that you can just play anything below IM level is a darn lie. The level of prep is now much higher than 30 years ago. I even seen 2300's complain about 1900's playing 20 moves of prep agaisnt them and struggling to find winning chances in some of their pet lines.

I have a 64% win rate with this d4 and Qd3 line. With the Morra, I had 55%, with Nf3 I barely reached 53%, and with b3 (Snyder), it was 54%

This line is amazing, and you hardly need to study anything

t’s all super easy.

Because you almost always reach the same positions.

I've spent hours and hours on Nf3 and the Morra wasted time.

My opponents (2300-2400) on Lichess have no clue, and that gives me an advantage.

The Sicilian has always been a headache, along with e5.

Until I discovered this Qxd4 line, and the same thing against e5.

The central opening 1. e4 e5 2. d4 with Qxd4

I have a 63% win rate with that line.

If you don’t want to try them, that’s on you more points for your opponents when they play the Sicilian against you.

Give it a chance, man.

I’ve tried everythin

The Closed Sicilian, your Wing Gambit, the Snyder Variation with b3 (which is my second option with White), the Morra, and then Open Sicilian lines with Nf3, where I prioritized setups where White fianchettos the g3 bishop against the Najdorf or the Dragon.

Even though it hasn’t been very effective in blitz, it has worked well in classical games.

What do you think about those positional lines with g3 against the Najdorf, Dragon, or Paulsen? Do you think the Sicilian player feels comfortable?

My compatriot, Grandmaster Paco Vallejo, once said in a chess24 video that the move Qd3 in the Sicilian Paulsen was very psychological and that Black has practical difficulties because that queen can later go to g3.

There is a brutal line that has very good percentages for White 55%

;it is this one:

you need to say plenty more.

The Chekhover variation is extremely dangerous. I lost several games against it when it started becoming popular by players.

I ended up having to study the line in order to prevent myself from getting all tangled up.

The move I play now is a6.

If you play Nc6, White will play Bb5 pinning the Knight which prevents White losing a tempo from Knight attack.

Also, A lot of players like playing c4 which turns the position into a Macrozy Bind sort of position which can be another issue depending on how a person responds to the Macrozy.

For Example:

I like playing the Hedgehog Defense against the Macrozy and the move Nc6 is not good in the Hedgehog. It is very important for the Knight to be on d7 so that awkward transposition can throw you off as well if you’re not expecting it.

I often don’t play Nc6 against the Chekhover Variation any more.

Perhaps, I should play Nc6. The issue is I haven’t found any lines I like.

Very awkward position which can be deadly if your not expecting it.