I don't think there is a forced refutation of 2.Bc4 winning a piece : 2.Bc4 is not that bad 
1. e4 c5 2.Bc4?
Sort:
This is pretty good for White.
hicetnunc wrote:
I don't think there is a forced refutation of 2.Bc4 winning a piece : 2.Bc4 is not that bad
I know the line I'm looking for is that bad for white, because after seeing it, I never even thought of playing that as white
1 e4 c5 2 Bc4 e6 gives black strong play with either ...d5 or ...a6...b5 to follow.
I think it's called the "Worrall Attack"
It's played by low-rated people who don't know what they're doing. Just play for d5 and you'll have at least an equal game.
My first attempts to counter the Sicilian revolved around Bc4. I was curbstomped so many times I never thought of trying it again.
ericmittens wrote:
I think it's called the "Worrall Attack"
It's played by low-rated people who don't know what they're doing. Just play for d5 and you'll have at least an equal game.
No, it can be played by many differnet kind of players. You can find games with this opening played by high-rated players. Below are some examples that I found on this site: http://www.chesslab.com/PositionSearch.html . I have chosen 3 examples where black answered 2... e6, since that is suggested in this topic as a good black answer; and I have chosen games where both players have a rating higher than 2400, which is pretty high compared with us "mortals"; and I have chosen a draw, a white win and a black win:
You found three games, big deal.
Besides, white had no advantage whatsoever out of the opening in any of those games. If you want an equal or slightly worse game as white out of the opening then by all means play the Worrall attack.
Why would anyone want to play a system that promises white nothing when there are quite a few systems in the sicilian which give white more?
ericmittens wrote:
You found three games, big deal.
Besides, white had no advantage whatsoever out of the opening in any of those games. If you want an equal or slightly worse game as white out of the opening then by all means play the Worrall attack.
Why would anyone want to play a system that promises white nothing when there are quite a few systems in the sicilian which give white more?
I found a lot of games with that opening on that site, not just 3. I just picked 3 with those options I mentioned in my former post since I found that relevant to the discussion in this topic: black second move e6, both high rated players (and in the same rating range) and a draw, a white win and a black win.
Why would anyone only play very standard opening moves and never try out different options?
In my experience it depends very much on the player how the game turns out. You don't win just by playing standard opening movess; as soon as you have passed the first moves you are on your own.
And the skill can increase a lot if you try out other things than the same opening moves again and again and again. I must admit that I have had a tendency to play the same openings and variations . Lately I am going into more unknown (to me unknown) variations to expand my playing skills and to get new challenges.
Of course there are other reasons besides the opening games go the way they do. The point is that there are FAR better ways to play against the sicilian than the Worrall Attack...so why would you play the Warroll Attack? Sure it might be fun just to shake things up in an offhand game once in awhile, but if you're actually trying to win usually its a good idea to play the best moves.
I certainly can't see that 2. Bc4 is that bad especially not when high rated players actually play it. S. Cicak seems to like it a lot (2 of the games I posted were played by Cicak, and afterwards I searched on Google with "Cicak,S" and found other games where he played it either as second or third move in Sicilian).
I also searched on Google for "Warroll Attack". Warroll Attack is a variation in Spanish (Ruy Lopez), it goes: 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 a6 4 Ba4 Nf6 5 O-O Be7 6 Qe2.
It is the move 6 Qe2 instead of Re1 that makes it Warroll Attack.
i think that 2.Bc4 is a horiible move for white.
i filtered the games in chessbase big 2004: (w/d/b).
1.e4 c5 2.Bc4, Total games: 2,371 (608/361/1,401). 33.3% for white.
compare with the global sicilian:
1.e4 c5, Total games: 524,804 (190,166/153,673/180,766). 50.9% for white.
Another idea to consider in this line is to not take the d pawn at all on d4,thus eliminating a lot of book moves in the Sicilian. On the database here, it lists this as the Bowlder Attack (I believe the ECO is B44 or B20). I get this line frequently and this is a reply i have come up with that has been about 50/50 chances for me. If anyone has suggestions to offer pro and con for this line, please feel free to quote or reply.
while not a master player, I have played this opening on both sides of the board and found Bc4 has its merits and drawbacks. It develops to a forward square but can be driven off if the d4 capture is declined. With sharp play though, white can at least maintian equality.
I have driven the B off even after cxd4.
If white studies good systems using 2. Bc4 it is an effective weapon. 2. Bc4 is a reasonable move! If white is just playing a move and doesn't know what he is doing, it will not turn out well, but you can say that about any opening.
You are absolutely correct sheardp. 4. c3 gives me some of the biggest challenges as Black as it can play into some odd lines of the Alapin as well. Still 2. Bc4 can be potent if white plays with an understanding of what long range tactical objective is to be accomplished from it. 4. c3 gives marginal equivalency according to Fritz X @ the 2000+ level but diminishes in playabilty above the 2600+ mark. Not sure what later analysis engines show for it though.
can someone run an analysis on this opening using fritz in an engine v engine mode and place statistics for w/l over course of matches utilizing the following ratings caps (1400-1599)? Also, if anyone has access to chessbase light, the overall statistics and most recent games to use this opening at the 2000-2399 rating level? i unfortunately do not have the software or cash to obtain either. Also, can someone confirm whether the ECO index for this is B20 or B44? Thanks.
The variation seems to be gaining a lot of popularity (go to live chess if you don't believe me, every second game features this move!). Most sugesstions on combating the line revolve around anulling the usefulness of the move with e6.
However, I remember a while back a member posted a refutation of this line that actually led to loss of material for white. Unfortunately, at the time I was not using the Sicilian as black and didn't take notes and I can't seem to find it now. Does anybody have this recorded?
Much appreciated!