Sicilian Defense..

One game from this variation appears in the ChessBase 2011 Big Database and won by White (non-master game played in 2007, 6.e5 Ne4 7.Bb5+ Bd7 8.Nxd5).  Not enough to go on.  It seems to have no name, so if you are successful with it maybe it will be named after you.

White can play 6.exd5, winning a pawn, as 6...Nxd5?? loses to 7.Bb5+ winning a piece.

pawn_eater analyzed "White can play 6.exd5, winning a pawn, as 6...Nxd5?? loses to 7.Bb5+ winning a piece."

do not think so, pawn_eater..

7.Bb5+ Bd7 8.Nxd5 Bxd5 Nxd5 Qa5+ and black gets his piece back.

                 8.Bxd7 Qxd7 and black defends the knight.

billwall has this line in the "ChessBase 2011 Big Database and won by White (non-master game played in 2007, 6.e5 Ne4 7.Bb5+ Bd7 8.Nxd5)."

8.Nxd5 Bxd5 9.Nxd5 Qa5+ 10.Ndc3 11.a6 Nd4 Qxe5 and black got the pawn back with an improved position..

Nice line pawn_eater, you must have enjoyed entering that :-)

Think pawn_eater gave an unbreakable refutation to 9...Qa5+ which is 10.b4..

Well, how about this line?

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 d5 6.exd5 a6..

Different from the Najdorf because black rid itself with the problem dpawn..

lol...well, that's the optimistic way of looking at it... 

I once played a guy (he later became a master) who came up with the following line against me (we ended up drawing):

Why not just instead try the following.  It saves a tempo and you'll have a better chance of getting a good position. 

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 d5 6.exd5 a6..

So no refutation on this line? might be a strong line..if nobody finds a refutation..hmmm, think me might be using this line on my games from now on..if nobody finds a refutation..

Remember this, paul?  Now it looks like you're getting the treatment (for many, there is nothing more inconvenient than the truth): 

Instinct says that Black should be punished for his complete waste of time in moving the pawn to d6 and then to d5 without even slightly inconveniencing White.  And indeed after 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 d5? 6.exd5 a6 (6...Nxd5?? 7.Bb5+ wins; 6...Nbd7 7.Bf4 Nb6 8.Ndb5 Nbxd5? 9.Nxd5 Nxd5 10.Qxd5! Qxd5 11.Nc7+) 7.Bc4! (7.Nf3 e6 8.dxe6?! Qxd1+ followed by ...Bxe6 with at least some compensation for the pawns.) 7...Nbd7 8.O-O Nb6 9.Qe2 White has an extra pawn and a positional vice grip.  One example might be 9...g6 (9...Nxc4 10.Qxc4 also intending Re1 and d6) 10.Re1 Bg7 11.d6! Qxd6 12.Bf4 Qd7 13.Nf5! gxf6 14.Rad1 and the Queen is lost, owing to the mate threat on e7. 

And I think that Paul is right about 6.e5!? as well.  After 6...Ne4 7.Bb5+ Bd7 8.e6 Bxb5 9.Ncxb5 g6 10.Bf4 White has a crushing attack.  My only criticism is that 6.exd5 gives you an extra pawn in hand, just in case Black somehow manages to weasel out of your positional vice grip. 

Even if Black doesn't waste a tempo and plays my suggestion of 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 d5, White can still get a better game with 6.exd5 (6.Bd3 e5 7.Nf3 d4 lets Black off the hook) 6...Nxd5 7.Bb5+ Bd7 8.Nxd5 exd5 9.O-O intending Re1.  But at least Black's not down material and he could easily equalize with inaccurate play by White. 

Despite this refutation, I still think the line is playable at lower rating levels.  White probably won't find a decisive continuation and Black's superior knowledge of the opening may compensate him for offering a pawn with no real compensation. 

erixoltan suggested "7.Bc4 Nbd7 8.o-o Nb6 9.Qe2 g6..."

how about 9...Nbxd5 instead of 9...g6? After the exchanges, black has taken the pawn back with a slightly improved position..

What about systems like

All true.  Another idea is 6...e6 7.Nc3 Bb4 when White is only somewhat better.  I also think 10...Ke7 11.Bc5+ Kf6! would avoid back-rank problems. 

Alright, I agree that the presented line is crap.  I was looking for alternatives, and apparently that is not one worth playing.  However this line doesn't seem too bad.