Bowdler wasn't a bad player though, he'd certainly have kicked your "donkey" .
AFAIK he was a British amateur, who became famous after drawing Philidor with "his" attack- which is his one and only saved game. For the record, Philidor played a blinfolded simul, and the game is full of errors- judge by yourself:
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.
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
The only GM's that have played that thing with some consistency are Zlatko Cicak and Marek Vokac. Both strong players, but certainly not top guns. Naka did not play that thing, even in blitz games. Probably in bullet, but who cares about bullet...
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" ?
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.
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.
When someone better than you offers advice, you should at least review that advice before being insulting. Naka can play it because...well hes a world class player. This also illustrates the misguided view that "if a GM plays it, i can play it" Yes you can play it, but that doesnt mean you understand it.
*Notice when I talk about the subject I am talking about the BOWDLER attack, as in 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4
Ah... so, this is the BOWDLER attack? A Sicilian starting with 1...e5 that is? Brilliant!
I mixed it up horribly with the Bowdler (not in capitals) attack 1.e4 c5 2.Bc4. Apologies...
About the most helpful thing you've said so far. I corrected my mistake, I did in fact mean 1.e4 c5 2.Bc4
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.
When someone better than you offers advice, you should at least review that advice before being insulting. Naka can play it because...well hes a world class player. This also illustrates the misguided view that "if a GM plays it, i can play it" Yes you can play it, but that doesnt mean you understand it.
It's only misguided if you play it without thinking what goes behind it. My purpose in playing the Bowdler attack is to learn everything there is about it. Same reason I landed on the 3 knights opening instead of using the wayward queen or going for the fools mate. I played them enough to know they are horrible. Shortly after that I came upon chessmaster grandmaster edition and learned some stuff. Going through the amaing lessons and during those breaks studying (in my own way) the bowdler attack.
K this is my analysis (although a 1400 player prob can't analyze)
Does anyone remember the over the shoulder boulder holder tops ?
I'm laffing so hard right now 'cuz I used to have a yellow one....
....
Bowdler wasn't a bad player though, he'd certainly have kicked your "donkey" .
AFAIK he was a British amateur, who became famous after drawing Philidor with "his" attack- which is his one and only saved game. For the record, Philidor played a blinfolded simul, and the game is full of errors- judge by yourself:
He played a match against Philidor, receiving odds, and the odds must have been very well judged because the score in favour of Philidor was only +3 -2 =3. That would put him head and shoulders above most of his contemporaries although chess has marched on since then.
Where the OP would feature in this scale is open to question -- perhaps you should try playing him a match conceding pawn and two moves and see how it goes, IM Pfren. 
Well, better be unhelpful, than delusional.
Oh, I'm that also. But give some credit to the dude who wrote the blog. I'm sure that pfren could tear it apart, but it made sense to me upon a first quick read.
IM pfren is a pumpkinhead........but he understands the e4 e5 & e4 c5 labrynth like noone else here. He could get to the middlegame "eke-will" with any player alive today....bar the Top 10.
And that's saying something.
Well, better be unhelpful, than delusional.
Oh, I'm that also. But give some credit to the dude who wrote the blog. I'm sure that pfren could tear it apart, but it made sense to me upon a first quick read.
No lol
IM pfren can't tear my Anti-Browlder blogs apart lol.
http://www.chess.com/blog/X_PLAYER_J_X/sicilian-defence
http://www.chess.com/blog/X_PLAYER_J_X/sicilian-defence-1
I checked those lines!
I checked them with engines and databases.
They are playable for black.
The only thing Pfren can tear apart is my spelling errors or terrible metaphor's. lol
The difference between my blogs and the OP's line is the move Nc3 vs Nf3.
In my articles I showed 3.Nf3.
The OP is doing 3.Nc3 which is sneaky.
Since the move 3.Nc3 adds more defense to the d5 square so black will have to get extra support in playing the move d5 later on.
However, 4...Nf6 or 4...Ne7 seem sufficent responses to deal with that.
Which has already been shown in diagrams by Veganomnomnom and Robert_New_Alekhine
Frankly, I dismiss 1.e4 c5 2.Bc4 all together.
I do not care how many Grand Masters play it.
After 2.Bc4 white has commited a crime.
They have wasted the white pieces!
Now if the OP wants to play Bc4 at move 6!
Than the picture changes!
For example:
Now that is a fine move!
The Fischer-Sozin Attack which was used by the Great Bobby Fischer.
Against the Sicilian Najdorf.
The move 6.Bc4 still remains as a top 5 move against the Najdorf.
It has lost some popularity due to chess hype!
I think 6.f3 and 6.h3 seem to be more popular recently.
However, I think they are greatly influenced by SGM players.
Yeah everyone wants to jump on the band wagon and play the popular flashy moves because another player plays it.
When Bobby Fischer was around all you saw was 6.Bc4.
Few months ago all you saw was the English Opening with 6.Be3 which was created by strong English Grand Masters who played it regulary and everyone jumped on that band wagon.
Than the move 6...Ng4 started getting played by black and they was like lets play 6.f3 to stop that!
So now 6.f3 is the new fashion move!
Yeah I love playing 6...Ng4 myself it is a nice move.
Can't blame them for playing 6.f3.
However, none of this changes the fact that Bc4 at move 6 in this position is respected!
At move 6 Bobby Fischer made Bc4 a novelty.
At move 2 The chess community made Bc4 dubious.
It is funny.
The bishop goes to the same c4 square.
However, by changing the timing of when you go to c4 the move can be a mistake or a novelty.
IM pfren is a pumpkinhead........but he understands the e4 e5 & e4 c5 labrynth like noone else here. He could get to the middlegame "eke-will" with any player alive today....bar the Top 10.
And that's saying something.
You don't need to be IM Pfren for that, just a decent and somewhat prepared player will do.
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?
Don't play it if you think u might pee your pants. X_PLaya's analysis seems sound.
look you can play this bc4 stuff and its not a disaster for you. but what is the point? what long term goals prompted you to commit bc4 on move 2 where the bishop is not even stable? i dont believe there is one...and its just bad idea to get used to playing chess that way. every move should have a logic to it.
The best thing about 2.Bc4 is if he gets in trouble, you can always move it back to where it was. And if worse comes to worse ?....remember, you have another one.
*Notice when I talk about the subject I am talking about the BOWDLER attack, as in 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4
Ah... so, this is the BOWDLER attack? A Sicilian starting with 1...e5 that is? Brilliant!
I mixed it up horribly with the Bowdler (not in capitals) attack 1.e4 c5 2.Bc4. Apologies...