ok so the line is 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 a6. Isn't this bad for black because White has 2 knights ( 1 in the center) while black just moved pawns the whole time (1 of which is the a pawn which shouldn't be done in the opening. Even if black plays something like Nc6, white can just capture and still be ahead in development. Somebody please help.

a6 isn't so bad of a pawn to push in the opening because it prevent knight moves to squares that become later forking threats and other threats for example in this case b5.this is preventing the knight in doing so, and even though white is ahead in development this book position in the paulsen is still considered a draw because of the possibilities black has against white. not what is actually there. white cant make too much progress that easily and black can catch up quickly

Also it opens a good spot for the bishop.

A common continuation is 5. Be2, Bc5 6. Nb3, Ba7 7. 0-0, Nc6

With Black's idea to play the eventual b5, Bb7 and mount a king side attack with bishops on a7 and b7.  White's e pawn is hard to defend well, as there is no pawn to support it - he will have to use pieces to defend pawns giving up some tempo.

It's definately one of my favorite Sicilian lines as black.

BYTHEWAY about the nc6. if you look on 365chess.com go to openings explorer it will have win percentages for 3.5 million games. nc6 right away afterwards has an extremely high loss percentage for black. you might wanna look at some of the games where black played nc6 and see what went wrong

This is a common Sicilian struggle between White and black and is inherent in most Sicilian games. I.e. White has more space and development where as black has a center majority, flexibility, and an open c-file. Black hopes the unbalances in the position will allow him chances later on to play for more than a draw.

Try not to get bogged down in numbers. Yes, white is up in development by two pieces, but there is nothing wrong with black's position and white has no forced line to an advantage.

Thanks guys. I appreciate all of you taking the time to help me learn this

My annotations of an OTB game that transposed into this line from the French may help you get a sense of some of the ideas in the Kan. It's a fun variation!

Rapid...I'd be interested in playing a couple games of this variation if you are...the Kan has always had me confused...especially from Black.

it looks kind of strange but black is super solid and can develop easily 

after Bc5 Nb3 he can even play bishop back to Be7

I play this and like it quite a bit. It's extremely flexible and black's pawn setup in many ways prevents quick attacks by white and therefore it's ok to get behind in development (of course there are still drawbacks to it anyway). At the same time black can slowly build up counterplay with ...b5 and usual queenside action, but his position is so flexible that say white tries a pawn storm with an early g4, then since the knight isn't on f6, there is no g5 threat, and black actually has the option of going queenside and undermining the kingside!

As Gonnosuke said the biggest drawback to the kan is the maroczy bind, but I think I could deal with it. Gonnosuke, although it seems ironic that black would go something positional like this in the sicilian, it's still an effective way to do it. I feel that black still has more potential counterplay than say the caro kann while still being solid.

To the OP, I get the feeling that you wouldn't want to play a variation like this, as it takes good understanding.

Black has to watch out and not try to develop everything on the queenside and neglect his king safety in the middle of the board.  I played this game recently here.

I think Rapidgeneralx was originally puzzled because Black seemed to be flouting the opening principal that we all learned as beginners: Get your pieces out and don't waste time with too many pawn moves! And Black certainly seem to be violating that. But those rules apply most directly to traditional open games (1. e4, e5) when the two sides come into contact immediately, and there are vulnerable f2/f7 squares to worry about. Black's setup in the Kann is based on a slower system of development, postponing contact until later. The e6 pawn creates a barrier against a quick Bc4. And 4....a6, whick looks so odd, is designed to both allow Black to put his Q on the excellent square c7, and to support the pawn thrust b5. In these semi-closed positions, rapid development counts for less than getting the right pawn structure and then developing your pieces around that structure.

Yeah when black is delaying his development like that regarless of the position he should be careful. And you have to understand why he's doing so if you want to do well with it.

What makes you think white's knights are developed on c3 and d4? These are nearly the worst squares on the board for the knights. Ok, that's an exagerration, but take a look at where the knights can go from the squares they are on. It's really nowhere unless you want to move them back to f3 and e2.

This is the point of black's pawn moves. Instead of making developing moves himself, black has undone the developing moves that white has made by controlling with pawns all of the squares the knights might move to.

Alright so my teacher and I talked about this and he said a typical position that may come out of this is a sicilian hedgehog. It looks like this with the future b5, d5 or maybe even e5. I hope this helps those who still don't understand this.  Anyone here have any other ideas for black to follow up with

I could be wrong, but I believe the Hedgehog formation is usually played by black in response to white playing c4 before playing Nc3 (known as the Maroczy Bind).  Right now, there is actually nothing to prevent black from playing ...b5.

For more information, see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mar%C3%B3czy_Bind
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedgehog_%28chess%29

5 c4.