2.Bc4 Sicilian

Sort:
Avatar of Optimissed
wornaki wrote:
Optimissed wrote:

Than, c3 Sicilian, Grand Prix, open Sicilians with various "attacks" and many more are all legitimate tries to catch black out. Black shouldn't play the Sicilian if s/he's not prepared for it, that's true.

 

Everything is legitimate (as long as it's a legal move), but 2.Bc4 robs the Sicilian of its beauty. Imagine what the world of chess would be like if 2.Bc4 was popular in high level chess. Imagine no true Najdorfs, Dragons, Kans, no Sveshnikovs... nothing, just because white decided to play 2.Bc4. Wouldn't that upset you as a chess fan? I would be really upset.

Maybe we're different because I'm definitely not a chess fan. I love playing and I'm not the slightest bit interested in other people's games. No doubt, it's a fault!

But you know, Bc4 is pointing at f7 and quite often, if black doesn't defend properly and is oblivious of central pawn storms and/or piece sacrifices, that useless bishop on that diagonal can win the game for white. I don't know what level you play at but I've been caught out by quite strong players who specialise in Bc4. Lately though, I've been winning because I'm much more careful.

Avatar of Strangemover
wornaki wrote:
Optimissed wrote:

Than, c3 Sicilian, Grand Prix, open Sicilians with various "attacks" and many more are all legitimate tries to catch black out. Black shouldn't play the Sicilian if s/he's not prepared for it, that's true.

 

Everything is legitimate (as long as it's a legal move), but 2.Bc4 robs the Sicilian of its beauty. Imagine what the world of chess would be like if 2.Bc4 was popular in high level chess. Imagine no true Najdorfs, Dragons, Kans, no Sveshnikovs... nothing, just because white decided to play 2.Bc4. Wouldn't that upset you as a chess fan? I would be really upset.

But this is not the case. Both at master level and amateur 2.Bc4 is rare compared to 2.Nf3 and the open Sicilians you mention (on this site you have faced 2.Nf3 in 11 games and 2.Bc4 in 2 games). So occasionally you have to play against something less common and not to your taste - this is why chess is such a rich, diverse and difficult game. 

Avatar of wornaki

Yes, well, my experience has been different elsewhere. And my point remains, it's far more common than it should be. And it is horrible happy.png Not that it's an opinion that you have to hold yourself.

Avatar of Optimissed

Learn to play well against it and you might find that a great big smile occurs when it happens!

Avatar of Laskersnephew

White: Carlsen Black: the OP 1.e4 c5 2.Bc4 care to place so bets on the outcome?

Avatar of wornaki
Laskersnephew wrote:

White: Carlsen Black: the OP 1.e4 c5 2.Bc4 care to place so bets on the outcome?

 

No need to bet. Guaranteed win for white. Now, if I were to play Carlsen, I wouldn't want to play a Sicilian. I would go down in flames with something much closer to my style. Also, yes, I was expecting the fallacy ad Carlsen (aka, fallacy of the GM) in defence of 2.Bc4 tongue.png

Avatar of Laskersnephew

After 1.e4 c5 2.Bc4 the better player will win! What's wrong with that?

Avatar of wornaki
Laskersnephew wrote:

After 1.e4 c5 2.Bc4 the better player will win! What's wrong with that?

 

It's just not attractive. It's meh. I don't need meh chess in my life, do you?

Avatar of Laskersnephew

That's the kind of insightful chess analysis that keeps me coming back to chess.com!

 

Avatar of wornaki
Laskersnephew wrote:

That's the kind of insightful chess analysis that keeps me coming back to chess.com!

 

 

Always a pleasure to serve you well sir!