Is there any refutation to the Sicilian Grand Prix Attack?

I wouldn’t avoid the Grand Prix because black has two strong replies with e6 or g6 (main lines) followed by a d5 push.

Even a6, b5, B7 as a fun sideline has even chances where you get both bishops x-raying the king side.

Simple flow chart:

Does an opening have a name?

Does that name have the word gambit in it?

If the answer to the first question is yes, and the answer to the second question is no (and even many gambits don't have a true refutation) then it doesn't have a refutation. 

There may be some exceptions (bong cloud maybe, but that's clearly a troll opening). 

IL give you two ways.. very simple.. 

1 .. play the French defence.

2. .. after the Sicilian is played and Nc3 haplens play a6 

Otherwise your dealing with the grandprix attack no matter how you play

#1
"Does there exist any clear refutation to the Grand Prix Attack?"
++ No, but 3...g6 and 3...e6 are fine for black.
"Are there any ways for Black to avoid the Grand Prix altogether?"
++ No, but there is no need to avoid it.

If you are a Najdorf, or Can player, you may play 2.Nc3 a6.

Now 3.f4 b5 and white has no good squares for his bishop outside the Grand Prix pawn wall, so he usually fianchettoes it, and we have a sort of closed Sicilian, where Black is doing well. Of course with 32 pieces on the board the positions aren't always intuitive, and some study is needed.

The Grand Prix move order 2.f4 is known to be harmless after 2...d5 (3.exd5 Nf6). Actually I think that white has to play the not-so-common move 3.Bb5+ to avoid surprises in the opening.

It's easy to avoid all together.  I avoid it all together.  You just have to pick your poison.

My poison is the Winawer, Steinitz, McCutchen, Classical, Tarrasch, Advance, and Exchange!  1.e4 e6!

Fighting the Sicilian With The Grand Prix Attack...

https://www.chess.com/blog/RussBell/fighting-the-sicilian-with-the-grand-prix-attack

see the cited YouTube video by 'ChessCoach Andras'

Ok guys this cracks me up. Hasn’t  the Grand Prix been around since the 1980s as a retort from the English against the Sicilian?

Its nothing to be scared of. Unless my very first chess coach coincidentally being English was a treason. God rest his soul.

I play a6 but then if it's the GPA I then play e6 and d5.I think it equalises. I get good games.

<<<<GM Hikaru Nakamura and IM Levy Rozman say Grand Prix Attack is "Legendary" (@32.12 of video)...>>>> (Quoted)

Didn't know that legendary is another word for moth-eaten.

GM Hikaru Nakamura and IM Levy Rozman (aka 'GothamChess') say Grand Prix Attack is "Legendary" (@32.12 of video)...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCVdrmKHdiI

No-one seems to have an answer to my approach to the GPA. It's like the Caro-Kann Advance. The strongest engines are now playing the line I invented two decades ago.

Here is a page of Links on the Gran Prix Attack.

At the Bottom on the Video Links there are Links to 6 Videos either trying to Refute it or ways to play against it.

 Bishops Bounty Gran Prix Attack Page

#10
"Hasn’t  the Grand Prix been around since the 1980s as a retort from the English against the Sicilian?"
The Grand Prix Attack was successful in Grand Prix tournaments in England. Those were Swiss tournaments over a weekend with several games per day and a shorter time control. The original Grand Prix Attack was with Bc4, intending a swift attack with O-O, Qe1, Qh4, f5 etc.  Later the British Grandmasters (Hodgson, Hebden...) shifted to the more positional Bb5 like a Nimzovich Indian Defence in reverse.

No, there is no "refutation".

Refutation seems to have been wrongly used. Weak play can be refuted. That means that the other side gains an advantage, by showing the weak play to be poor.

I don't think 1. e4 .... c5 2. Nc3 .... Nc6 is good for black, if black is looking to win, because it doesn't lead to the Kan and Paulsen lines. There are many lines where the N should be at d7. It shouldn't be developed so early.

White's making no effort to hide his intentions by playing the grand-prix attack. He's looking forward to using his f-pawn as a spearhead to breakthrough decisively on the K-side (where black's expected to castle). And also, if this strategy is allowed to play out, it'll more often than not turn out to be really effective.

Keeping that in mind, I would recommend an early ...a6 and b5, followed by a quick Q-side development and ...0-0-0. Then we can attack white's K using the "hook" created by f4 (...g5 etc). Of course, white'll also attack you on the Q-side and the game will be double-edged, but if you're an 1.e4 c5 player then I suppose you'd be at home in such positions.

For me personally it has worked out quite well (when I used to play 1.e4 c5 - I seldom do nowadays), so I'd encourage you to try it at least once to see if it suits you.