1. e4 c5 2. c3 e5!?

Hey guys!

I'm in preparation for a game and I was looking at a guys game. As White, when I play 1. e4 he plays 1... c5 Sicilian and after 2. c3 he plays 2...e5!? Which is an odd move. Is there any special refutation? Now one thing I know about my opponent is that he is a very strong positional player, so if this line gets into a positional line let me know

If this also helps, after 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 he plays 2... e6 so maybe 3. c3 may throw him off? Let me know your thoughts

It's positionally inaccurate. It leaves too many holes and diagonals for attack. Also, it doesn't prevent d4 and black can get left with an isolated d-pawn and no compensating development.

I agree with Urk. I get that you are white and you're wondering if he can play 2 ...e5. It's a bad move. Also, after 2. Nf3 ...d6 3. c3 ...Nf6 you're into some lines unique to that move order which he may have studied and which certainly are positional in nature. Whereas, after 2 ... e6 3. c3, there is a highly positional line based on 3. ...d5, which is also available by transposition in the normal move order but which may well be natural to play after the move order you propose.

The book  move in the Alapin after 1.e4 c5 2.c3 Black's best  is 2...Nf6.

One strategy with 2...nf6, is transpose  into a favorable  variation of the Alekine's Defense for  Black.

I play 1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5. It's partly a matter of taste but one can justifiably argue that 2. ...d5 is an attempt to win, whilst 2 ...Nf6 isn't. When I started out, I found I could easily draw against far stronger players if they played 2 ...Nf6. Not so against 2 ...d5, which is positionally far more tricksy.

Very difficult to play against. If white doesn't attack, black isolates and blockades the d pawn. Therefore white has to attack, so it gets sharp and maybe black wins.

With the line 1.e4 c5 2.c3 e5!?  the move 2...e5!? is anti--positional because it leaves Black's d5 square without any pawns to defend the square.  Your positional  opponent will most likely not play that move.

Regarding the delayed Alapin 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.c3 Because you state that your opponent is a positional player he  will most likely chose 3...Nf6.  Despite opinions that 3...d5 is an attempt to win and 3...Nf6 isn't.  Knowing what I know about this  opening leads me to lean in favor of 3...Nf6.  That is all I will  post for now.

The important issue in this opening is  the  move 2.c3 or 3.c3.  Both  moves  are pawn moves.  The uppermost fact about any pawn moves to keep in mind is that they are permanent.  Pawns cannot move backwards.  With a pawn move you are also giving  your opponent a guideline regarding any future pawn structure in the game.  That advance notice can be used by the enemy to gain advantage.

Finally:  Winning chess is  the  strategically/tactically correct advance of  the pawn mass.

And, Optimissed regarding 2...d5 let's one of the cats out of the bag.  But remember the warnings about pawn moves..

Yeah I've looked at 2... d5 he might also play that, but based on the games I have on him, he plays 2...e5. 

But after 2...e5, what would you suggest the moves I play after that. 3. Nf3!? maybe. What should be my plan

And, Optimissed regarding 2...d5 let's one of the cats out of the bag.>>>

???
You either play the line 2. ...d5, or you don't, although it can be played in some cases after 2. e6, although there, white can transpose to a French.

In essence it's like saying that 1. e4 lets one of the cats out of the bag.

Just to clarify, I am playing White

3.Nf3 is good.  Make the square d5 an outpost for your Ns.   They cannot be dislodged from d5 by pawns.

The thing about 2. ...e5, as I pointed out earlier, it doesn't actually prevent d4 and would perhaps leave black with an isolated d-pawn in unfavourable circumstances. But it doesn't protect f7 either. Move like Bc4, Nf3, Qb3, 0-0 are well motivated. White has better open lines and can attack the kingside with pieces. White can play d4 at a strategically or tactically beneficial moment and can develop with threats whereas black's pawn position is too rigid. A good attacking player should win as white.

Optimissed:  I will  answer the 1.e4 question.  Yes, you have created a target for Black.  The white pawn at e4.

the other question requires detailed explanation. I am too lazy right now to do that.   

Well, I prefer 1. d4, but that doesn't mean that 1. e4 is a bad move. I consider 1. d4 slightly stronger than 1. e4 and 1. c4 slightly stronger still, but the differences are incremental and don't amount to a difference between a loss and a win. Since I found it easy to draw with white against players 300 or 400 stronger than me, even when I was a beginner, when they played Nf6, I play 2. ..d5 as black. I'm aware that it's more difficult to play than the Nf6 line but it's far more difficult for white too. Raising the difficulty and sharpness level makes it more likely that the better player on the day will win. Very often they refuse to recapture on d4 with the c3 pawn and they play for a q-side pawn majority instead, together with maneuvering their pieces. Very often all this is far too slow. When they're scared of playing with an isolated pawn, then you know you hold a psychological advantage.

You make excellent points with all of  your posts.  I am certain that you have played the black side of this variation against strong opposition and done well.  I also have played the white side of this variation many times against strong opposition and done well.

Let me suggest that you read up on Nimzowitsch's section titled:  the Isolated Pawn and it's descendants.

Optimissed:  do you know GM Ron Henley?