Sicilian: What should I do about 2. Bc4?

I can't find a whole bunch of material on this. However, at class level, all of the stuff I studied from the black point of view about the open sicilian doesn't seem to matter... Mostly because almost nobody plays 2. Nf3 against me! How strange it was to look over my archive of played games and realize how many contained the moves 1. e4 c5, and how few continued with 2. Nf3... I'm in a rut. What do I do against these "popular" anti-sicilians with no literature behind them?

The first one

1. e4 c5  2. Bc4

I usually play 2. ... Nc3 and continue with the idea of fianchettoing my king's bishop.

The second one

1. e4 c5  2. c4

I know this line is popular for a reason. It created the Maroczy Bind formation. But what to do? Again, I usually aim to fianchetto my king's bishop.

Anyone else peeved by the fact that they never get to play the open sicilian as black that the feel so comfortable with anymore? Any ideas on what to do?

e6

If players around your rating level are beating you with this Bowlder Attack...that probably means you need to work on your tactics. 

the second one...good question...I generally do 2... Nf6 but we can go look at a database and see what ideas are popular?

Lots of people play Nf3...but I try to play 1500's and up and I find it as common as anti Sicilians.

they can try a lot of stuff but something like that is common

Ok, to OP:  database makes it look like 2...Nc6 is the overwhelmingly popular response.  good to know. 

I never consiedered playing 2...e6, I'll try it the next chance I get. thanks!

yeah, as Afaf says, you can play a good developing move 1st.. but eventually you want to take advantage of the poor bishop placement and thrust at the center with e6+d5, which equalizes.

There's a reason why you don't see very many sicilians at "class level" (I'm assuming that's equivalent to club level). I once asked an ~1800 how I should go about playing as the sicilian as black, and he told me that you shouldn't even be thinking about sicilian defenses until you have a rating of at least 2200. That might be a bit dramatic, but the point is still valid. There's just too much theory to make it worth playing.

The sicilian, while theoretically good for black, is very hard to play (for both white and black). I learned the hard way that, as black, even if white goes along with your plan (in the opening, at least), usually you're on your own after the 12th or 13th move, whereas white's goals are almost always to push pawns and cramp black's position, and his main line develops all of his pieces pointing directly at the kingside. The English attack in the Najdorf and the Yugoslav attack in the Dragon both have these goals.

Even as white, if I face 1.e4 c5 now, I just avoid the lines altogether and use the Smith-Morra Gambit (2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3). At lower rated levels, a pawn difference doesn't decide the entire game and many games don't even make it to an endgame. There's always a chance that black will have more theory in any open sicilian main line than i do, so there's no point in me learning all there is to know about it.

Realize that even though a particular line is popular and/or for black (the sicilian and the king's indian defense being good examples), there is usually just too much theory to make it worthwhile. Consider using more classical openings (1.e4 e5) or lines without a ridiculous amount of theory behind them (1.e4 d5). In lower rated games, statistics are the last thing that matters in determining who wins a game.

To answer your question, though, you should play e6 and go for d5, forcing white to lose a tempo repositioning its bishop.

Why so much worry about an opponent being better book-prepared? If they are, they are. And if so, they're likely better studied in any other opening you choose, unless you go to something really off the beaten path. And if you do, well there's a reason it's way off the beaten path - it probably isn't very sound.

I think your best bet is to play what you like and just play your best game...

I do agree with Robotronic that opening stats matter little to most low and mod-level games. Which only hardens my opinion above.

Your comment is kind of odd considering that you and the OP are essentially at the same playing level.  Bc4 lines are no big deal in the Sicilian...but someone made the comment about not playing the sicilian until you're a 2200 player.  I understand that point.  Sicilian is one of the most complex and heavily analyzed of all of the openings.  To venture into it with out being rather well prepared is really asking for being crushed on occaissons when you play someone who's booked up. 

To the OP, I'd suggest that if Bc4 lines are causing you headaches and you like to play king side finchetto as black, why not avoid the issue all together and just play pirc/modern against e4?   The odds of being crushed are much less for black there against a booked up white opponent although there are certainly some sharp lines at whites disposal depending how black plays. 

A very wise grandmaster once told me that it's more important to play openings that give you the kinds of positions that you are comfortable playing, regardless of what the books say is better or worse.  If slash and burn type openings you could try  b5 pawn sac against Bc4, then after Bxb5, ...c6 followed d5 with a wide open game and attacking chances.  If you prefer quieter games, play the pirc/g3/modern or play e6 and play a closed sound positional game looking for couter punching...It all depends on what kind of game you're comfortable with.  Once you know that, then you can start seeking out variations that suit your temperment.

Regarding my last post the other advantage of pic/modern/g6 defense is that you can play it as black against virtually any white opening set up.  AND, you can play it as white against virtually any black set up.  It's very versitaile and eliminates the need to be booked up on all sorts of crazy lines that might 10, 15, or even 20 moves deep.

Is the Pirc a quieter game ? It can be quite sharp, especially when the White castles long. Also he might find that a lot of people rated around 1400-1500 will play 2.Bc4 or some such against the Pirc too.

I think that the best way to go about beating 2. Bc4 is to aim for a set up that will let you transpose back into main lines.  The Najdorf for example is what I play so see the game for how to prepare for a possible later d4.

I don't understand what's odd about it.  If someone of my same playing level is winning with an inferior opening, what would that suggest to me?  That I need to step up the rest of my playing skill...as it's not the Bc4 that is some brilliant superior move that I have to wrestle with. 

The pirc can be quiet..I'm simply saying that since he mentioned liking kingside fianchetto and found Bc4 annoying in the sicilian he might avoid the whole mess mess by NOT playing sicilian.  It's hard to avoid sharp openings all the time, but if one limits what openings one plays then the patterns and tendencies of those openings can be come more well understood.  Of course experienced players know that sharp doesn't mean better, it just means sharp.

Well, two things...first I thought it odd that you were coaching him as if from a position of superior understanding.  Second there is no reason, whatsoever, to say that 2. Bc4 is an inferior move.  There is absolutely nothing wrong with it.  It may not be the most flexible but it quite a sound and natural developing move.

I'm not sure if you were talking about me here or not, but you and I are in agreement.  People should play the openings that they feel most comfortable playing to hell with what the books or whatever say.  My point is that the OP is obviously not comfy playing against the Bc4 line in the the sicilian, so either he needs to book up or find a different opening. :)

Nope.  I am not coaching nor do I claim any superior chess understanding.  It's just me and my fellow chess player and I'm giving my opinion on a matter.  I didn't realize we had to wait for the "superior" players to discuss our ideas.