2. Bc4 against the sicilian.

What is so terrible about this move that most opening books fail to give it more than the slightest reference? Richard Palliser's "Fighting the Anti-Sicilians" - an entire book dedicated to tricky, non-standard Sicilians, and the only thing he says about it is that it's misguided due to e6. 

However Houdini doesn't hate this move, and if you go through the variations, it gets slightly tricky at times (at least in blitz, where you're a lot more likely to see it), since black has to make sure white's bishop really is shut out while and end up making moves such as Be6 to support the d5 pawn. 

I realize that Bc4 is the first idea of people who don't have a clue about openings, however I can't help but feel it's not actually so bad, or at least I couldn't convincingly refute it.

(p. 119)
CHAPTER
7
Sturdy King
Pawn Openings

FOR MANY NOVICES, THE OPENING MOVES constitute something of a
mystery. Why, for example, after 1. e4 c5 (the Sicilian Defense) does White
play 2. Nf3 rather than, say, 2. Bc4? We think of the hundreds of books on
Sicilian opening variations and then tend to decide that 2. Bc4 has some
specific flaw. Perhaps the threat of ... e7-e6 and ... d7-d5, forcing White to
move his Bishop and thereby to lose a tempo, is the reason we rarely see
2. Bc4 played.
   In truth, however, opening moves are based on definite ideas, which
are usually there even if not often obvious. In the case of 2. Bc4 in the
Sicilian, there is no specific flaw, no killer refutation; this early Bishop
move simply doesn't conform to the principles of sound opening play--
principles that you will learn to appreciate in this chapter.

Alburt, Lev, and Larry Parr. 1997. Secrets of the Russian Chess Masters, Volume 2: Beyond the Basics. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.

Decent players have tried it. I think it's just one of those white moves that gives up equality. If you can use it to get a unique positions you understand well then it's probably a good practical choice.

If it's similar to the reversed Sicilian after 1.c4 e5 then there are a few ideas. Getting tempo with d5 is one of them. Tempo for expanding on the queenside is another. There are also kingside attacking ideas if the bishop finds itself misplaced on the q-side.

Although I'm interested what Leb Alburt's book's conclusion on the move is. My guess is something about committing it too early but I'm not sure.

See this. I play this trap against many players.

http://www.chess.com/livechess/game?id=1029714218

Interesting. Do you have any more like that where 2...e6 is played and also any other examples where something other than 2...e6 is played?

@XPLAYERJX (and anyone else):

What are your thoughts on playing the Alapin as White? I see some strong players advocating for playing the Alapin as White, and some against.

Play it if you want. It might not be the most accurate but as the secrets of the troll thread shows, who cares.

Umm.. I need to check my games. :)

I feel that this is the best for white instead of Bc4.

This can turn into any result, and is very interesting to play. White can storm his pawns in the kingside whereas Black can generate an attack on the queenside.

Most people play Bc4 because they think the Sicilian is like e5 and they try to play the normal e4 e5 line.

OK. I'll wait. Thanks.

I missed out on the secrets of the troll thread. I saw it, but typically skip any threads with the terms "troll" or "I invented a new opening that has never been attempted and is unstoppable yay OMG" in the titles. Now I am curious, however.

I think Dan Heisman calls it, the High School Mate. I have played against Bc4 a lot, especially when you play anonymously on sparkchess. Players there are usually very weak, and they go for the easy checkmate with queen and bishop. I can't recall having lost a single game against that opening, and I play 2...e6 instantly. As XPLAYERJX said, this position is well known for intermediate players, and we know what to do. Once they see they cannot checkmate you in 3 moves, you can kick around their bishop or even capture it.

That check just develops my position if you look carefully.

e6 develops blacks dark squared bishop making the attack on c4 nullified......it might look like a developing move for white its not because he has nothing to attack with. There are many variations with e6 sicilian kan sicilian pin variation not just Bc4. No you are not playing a e4 e5 set up or it could work.

Chicken_Monster wrote:

prashanth222000 wrote:

See this. I play this trap against many players.

http://www.chess.com/livechess/game?id=1029714218

Interesting. Do you have any more like that where 2...e6 is played and also any other examples where something other than 2...e6 is played?

2.Bc4 is outright bad but you can play it after 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bc4 and play like an Italian.

Try this variation.

The queen is lot better in d7 in this position.

XPLAYERJX,

Nice explanation and examples. I didn't know those subtleties of the Sicilian Defense.

leiph18,

I didn't get into that chapter of Alburt & Parr's book deeply enough to learn exactly to which principles they were referring. It was just a library book I had borrowed for a while for other reasons, and the only reason that one paragraph stood out for me was that this is about the third thread I've seen where somebody asked that same question, so I thought it would be a good excerpt to have on hand. I was right.

prashanth222000,

Great game! I'm surprised your rating isn't much higher.

 XPLAYERJX wrote:

XPLAYERJX, thank you for your lengthy post. However what if he plays Ba2? That seems like the critical move, and the reason for playing a3/a4 in the first place.  I certainly do not fear 2. Bc4 if it's not followed up by a3 or a4. However with these moves, white gets a chance to tuck his bishop away on that diagonal.

Now consider that if at any point we allow him to transpose into a "real" opening then we've failed to punish him. The bishop is not ludicrous in the way that 2. Qf3 or 2. Qh5 is a ludicrous. Many white players will play f3 at some point which is damages some black plans, and develop their knights to good effect.  

There are hundreds of real variations with a pawn on e6 where white brings his bishop to c4. Fischer wasn't playing like a patzer when he blew the world's best away in the 60s/70s using the Sozin Sicilian (with bishop on c4). I just don't see how it can be dismissed outright.