A Passive Sicilian?

Generally, the Sicilian isn't passive. But imo, something like a Scheveningen setup (which I call a turtle) looks very passive, albeit extremely solid. Let's not worry too much about theory, and take a look at the position in question:

I'm curious here, does anyone play this setup, and what does it feel like when you play it? Does it feel passive, or does if feel like you're building up potential pawn breaks? Because black can't really equalize until he does get a B- or D- pawn break.

You said that you don't want to get theoretical but you kind of have to

The reason it looks passive is that you don't know the right way to play it.

After 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4, Black should play 4...Nf6, to pressure e4.  You might occasionally get a 5.f3, which I have played a lot, but then Black should not follow his "Open Sicilian" line and play either 5...e5 and 6...d5, 5...e5 and 6...Be6, transpose to the Accelerated Dragon, or play a hedgehog setup.

Otherwise, 99.5% of the time, you'll get 5.Nc3, and now there is no Maroczy Bind.

e6 and d6, used in a number of Sicilians, is called the Small Center.  It is not passive at all.

A "Scheveningen" wouldn't have a pawn on c4.

A "dragon" would have a pawn on g6 and fianchettoed bishop on g7.

A Maroczy bind would have a pawn on c4, like shown.

A hedgehog would have black pawns on a6/b6/d6/e6 and bishop on b7.

Your move order (playing d6) allows transposition to Scheveningen (B80), but White chose a Maroczy Bind.

I'd look into playing hedgehog with 5...Nf6 then Be7/a6/O-O/b6/Bb7 instead of Nc6 first

Here's an older game with a hedgehog vs a similar White setup to what you faced:

As ThrillerFan points out, your example has nothing to do with a  Scheveningen setup, where Black would invariably play 4...Nf6, so there would be no bind. in the Chessbase database 4.d6 is played far less than 1% of the time

"It still “looks” passive to me."

This is a position where black and white both have their positional trumps, and the player who does the best job of using their advantages will win. This doesn't sound like a passive approach to me.

I mean, graphically it looks like black is hunkering down, waiting to weather the storm white will throw at him; afterwards, black will come out and fight. 

“The player who does the best job of using their advantages will win”

-Tigran petrosian was known for passive play... he wins some games. 

Im NOT saying the Scheveningen is bad... I’m saying it looks passive, since it gives white a space advantage. However, it probably isn’t, as @thrillerfan pointed out:

”it’s called a small center, not passive” (something like that)

@perpetuallypinned showed a game where black adopted that setup, and by move 18 (in my view) was pretty cramped, but white overextended (probably due to his g5 push) and black punished white for it.

So I suppose it’s more like a “bait-and-punish” type opening? Or is there something else?

SNUDOO - Why don't you read "The Sicilian Scheveningen:  Move by Move" and 6 months later, when you're done, you can admit that your assessment was wrong.

I played the Najdorf for about a year, and often times, the Scheveningen lines (6...e6) rather than the pure Najdorf lines (6...e5) and very briefly I played the "Modern" Scheveningen (No ...a6).

While I may be more of a French guru than a Sicilian expert, I have played it long enough to know that the Scheveningen is not passive what-so-ever!  Can I tell you the latest novelty on move 21?  No!  But as basic as passive vs not passive, I can assure you, the Scheveningen is NOT passive!

Theoretically a game well played with

accurate and sweet

tactical attack

How you feel about an opening is very dependent on your overall positional preferences as a player; so if this 'feels' passive to you then fine, don't play it (I don't either, as I don't enjoy facing the Keres attack). However, as others have pointed out, to suggest it is objectively passive when so deeply established in theory and chosen by so many top players, is perhaps pushing it.

Yes, that's what I'm saying. Again, I'm not claiming the Scheveningen structure is bad, but is simply a passive position, and doesn't sit well with the stereotype of the "fighting Sicilian Defense". Of course, the potential of the black pieces (once he gets a pawn break through) will be much bigger, and black will be anything BUT passive... however, in the opening, the structure is not "active" at all.

So what I was asking was, what does if FEEL like when you play this structure? Counterpunching? Aggressive? etc.

I'm not going to buy the book you said, not because I don't want to know why (I do), but spending money on my 11th opening book when I have 13 just doesn't suit me. In my experience (from white) I've found the Scheveningen structure a tough nut to crack; in a recent daily game, I played the Keres Attack against my 2000-rated opponent and lost. For me, attacking the Scheveningen feels like throwing myself into a wall face-first repeatedly, which didn't do anything for my suspicion that it was a passive structure compared to other sicilians. 

I agree with you here (depends on preferences), and I also might be pushing it a bit, but what I wanted to know was (to the people who played this before) is what they feel the opening is like. 

Is it counterpunching? Solid? stuff like that.

Having less space and being passive aren't the same thing.  Passive implies that all you are doing is blocking the punches and figuring as long as you survive all 10 rounds in the ring, great, mission accomplished!

That is not at all what Black does in the Scheveningen.  Sure, there are threats by White that must be answered.  But Black is not playing a passive game at all.  He is typically building a Queenside attack, expanding with b5 and attacking down the c-file.  In lines where White castles Queenside, like the English attack, it is usually a bloodbath.  In the Classical Scheveningen, where White castles short, Black's attack is still on the Queenside, though it tends to me more methodical, and he is also usually looking for that opportunity to counter strike in the center with either ...e5 (often preceded by a Knight trade on d4) or ...d5.

Passive would be more like the Philidor or Old Indian.

Ok, I've already understood that, but what do you think the Scheveningen style is? Like chess personality tests-but for openings.

I do not categorize openings.  This whole X is positional, Y is tactical, Z is aggressive is total BS.

I have over 2900 slow time control tournament games over the board.  I had a really wild Exchange French yesterday that ended in a wild draw by perpetual check that I had to take despite being up material (if I can find it after posting this, I'll put the link in another post on this thread).

I have had dull Najdorfs, wild Slavs, dull Kings Gambits, wild Petroffs.

There is no one size fits all to describe any opening.

Believe it or not, there is a reason I am a huge advocate of the French (despite having occasionally played other defenses to e4 for variety) and still am scrambling for the ideal defense to d4 and what to play as White.  It is similar to being a baby and allowing the baby to become left or right handed on their own.

I first learned how to play in 1983 at the age of 8.  Played occasionally at the same frequency that you'd play Monopoly.  In the fall of 1995, My junior year of college at age 20, I studied my first book, "Winning Chess Tactics" followed by "Winning Chess Strategies" and "How To Win in the Chess Endings".  During that time, I was winging it in the opening.  Experimented with various moves.  The main person that would stay up all night in the lobby of the dorm always played 1.e4.  I fiddled with different pawn ideas.  e5, d6 and e5, c6 and f5, c5, e6 and d5, Nc6 I seem to recall, etc.  I became very comfortable with e6 and d5 and asked if it had a name.  I find out it is called the French Defense, and my 4th chess book, and first opening book, was Winning With the French by Wolfgang Uhlmann.

In my 2900 or so games, roughly 1450 to 1470 of them as Black, I probably have about 500 to 600 games on the Black side of the French.  In those 500 to 600 games, I have had everything from Ultra Dull to Head spinning, Hair raising wild goose chases.

So again, you can not categorize an opening.  Even the scheveningen.  You will have wild hair raising games and you will have those where watching paint dry may be more interesting.

Here is the game I was referring to in post 25.  It is blitz, so throw quality out the window, but if you try to categorize the opening, people describe the exchange French as dull.  This game was not dull.  Not saying it was played well, just saying it was not dull.

https://www.chess.com/live/game/4997527095

Cheap skate!  I have 300 to 400 books, probably all but 100 of them are on Openings.

Actually, in the last three weeks or so, I have bought 5 books, 4 of them on openings!

Soon you will learn that being cheap does not work when it comes to openings.  Especially the Sicilian, where theory changes drastically!  I have more than double the number of French books than you have total opening books!