sicilian bowdler

As far as I know, the Sicilian defense is used to indirectly attack the center. The bowdler attack basically forces the game back to the center. Why then is it considered "misguided" and "ineffective" ?

Because black can play 2.e6 then d5 a couple moves later and gain a tempo on the bishop. The bishop must move again early which gives black easy equality.

Read this for a good explanation:

http://www.chess.com/blog/X_PLAYER_J_X/sicilian-defence

http://www.chess.com/blog/X_PLAYER_J_X/sicilian-defence-1

So both of you basically say black responds with e6. I've always responded to this move with nc3 which usually is responded to with d5 and then I win 2 pawns for 1 pawn and I have central dominance. Chicken_Monster does have a good point towards the end of that explanation (Don't show your hand to early). Also mentioned the Fischer-Sozin attack. I'll look into it and see if I can get the hang of it. Thanks for the response Chicken_Monster.

I've only seen this garbage in online chess.

DrSpudnik, grandmasters play the Bowdler, on occasion, so what makes you think YOU,  a casual player, have any right to say this move is garbage? You basically just said Nakamura is garbage. I dare you to say that to his face lol. Next time you decide to say a specific opening is trash, perhaps you should look at some master games. Yes, there are a number of master level games that utilized the Bowdler attack.

mikesully52, by calling it the Bowlder attack you are suggesting that most of the people playing it recognise it a definite opening with its own set of ideas. In fact, most of the people playing it are more likely to have a very limited knowledge of opening theory and like to think they can play 1e4 2Bc4 to all of White's responses.

To further illustrate this mindless(?)/habitual playing of 2Bc4 I play the French defence (1e6) and I still see this on a fairly regular basis. I mean why? White's immediate threat on f7 was blunted by 1e6 and the idea of my first move is to support d5, which will force the Bishop to move again and prevent White's chance of exploiting f7 even further.

you don't need to play it as a French. a6, b5, Bb7 kicks that bishop around and pressures e4. d3 is usually needed, so it becomes a closed Sicilian.

Yes, 1. e4, c5; 2, Bc4, e6; 3. Nc3 is indeed powerful against an opponent who doesn't know how to count up to three, but I don't play people like this very often.

Nakamura can play anything he wants, he's that good. He even played the Parham a few years back. An early Bc4 is lame and won't help the average player do more than swindle idiots in on-line blitz games. What do the opening database statistics say for white's chances?

Not talking about using 2.Bc4 regardless of blacks move, I'm talking in response to the Sicilian. Any other move by black and I would never play Bc4. By calling it the Bowdler attack I'm letting you know that I'm talking about in response to the Sicilian.

e6 I I'll probably respond with d4.

 Results of previous games do NOT equal what your chances of winning are regardless of what opening you play. Just because you go through a normal variation of the sicilian defense, or the alapin, closed variation, whatever, doesn't mean that black automatically has a better chance of winning. Hell, it doesn't even mean they have control over the situation.

 Again, this same variation is played by masters...

Out of all the responses given, only one was helpful. Thanks again Chicken_Monster.

Better to admit ignorance than to arrogantly assume what you believe is the truth without absolute proof. As far as I can tell, there is no absolute proof. Other openings are thoroughly analyzed. Why not this one? Best I can tell is everyone assumes it's part of the so-called "Fools Mate" and just ignores it. I'll be putting everything I have into this line and even if turns out to be garbage at least I'll be able to give out a thorough explanation as to why. Every single time I hear someone discredit the Bowdler attack they just say "Oh, you can just do this" instead of talking about the Bowdler attack itself.

*Notice when I talk about the subject I am talking about the BOWDLER attack, as in 1. e4 c5 2. Bc4

Those masters are probably not assuming Black will promptly drop a pawn with 3. ... d5 though. And otherwise, chances are White is losing tempo soon.

Bowdler wasn't a bad player though, he'd certainly have kicked your "donkey" .

If the line was considered particularly worthwhile at GM level then it would have been analysed thoroughly just like all the other heavily analysed Sicilian lines. In terms of you playing it, your blitz rating appears to be 744, in which case, it is probably ok for you to play.

I challenge you to a game in the Bowdler. 

Here''s some analysis:

As we can see from all these lines, white will lose time in the opening and will have to break opening principles. His bishop on c4 is misplaced and will easily come under attack.

I do not believe that this opening has been played by Nakamura or another other top GM for many years by now. Please show me a single game 

Its considered "misguided" and or "ineffective" because white brings the bishop out early where it is exposed to attack.  White basically does not follow the opening principles.  Yes its playable, just not optimal.