Here's some analysis I've done on it so far. Hopefully other people will have things to add, I believe there are some themes such as control of the open e-file and others.
Someone needs to write a book on the Bowlder attack
Sort:
Interesting -- I just ran into the Bowlder attack myself (I had to look up the name of the opening, I had never seen it before). It's an ongoing game, so I won't say anything specific, but it certainly looks like a reasonable anti-Sicilian to me.
Oct 8, 2013
0
#4
Interesting thread. I don't think I have ever seen this before in any of my games. Usually against the Sicilian I will play the Kan structure with e6 and a6. In one of my games I would probably try this rather than going for the super quick d5.
I think Black has probably at least equalised in this line so maybe not the most testing Sicilian for White but certainly worth considering. 
Thanks guys. That is another option with the Kan/Paulsen set-up and I read in a years old thread about the Bowlder attack, IM Pfren wrote this was a Sicilian Kan with the white bishop on the worst possible square.
Against the Sicilian 2. bc4 is a very popular move, and I know it's not just me as in this thread http://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/1-e4-c5-2bc4 Kingfisher wrote "The variation seems to be gaining a lot of popularity (go to live chess if you don't believe me, every second game features this move!)." And many other people agree with him, and these are fairly high ranked players of 1600 and up saying they see it a lot.
It's not supposed to be good as "it gives black equality". Well, from a GM perspective giving black equality out of the opening may be terrible, but for average people so what? They gave black equality and it's an equal position, they don't care. Plus they're playing as white and already a tempo ahead so they can afford to do stupid things like moving their bishop twice.
Personally the bowlder attack annoys me, even though I win slightly more games against it than I lose. (I have used both strategies of the early d5 push and the more restrained Kan set-up.) It's not that the Bowlder attack poses an impossible challenge, it's just not fun. I think it should be called "the poo-head attack" because mostly poo-heads use it, and while beating up poo-heads is not particularly difficult, it is rather annoying because you get poo on you during the process, and it gets on the chess board too.
White players will try anything to get out of the open SIcilian. And if learning the Bowlder attack, Alapin (yawn!), Smith-Morra, Wing gambit, and Grand Prix attack isn't enough, there's also the Smith-Morra Danish variation. I was happy that I finally found a good set up against the standard Smith-Morra but now it seems like those poo-heads are using the smith-morra danish variation everytime they use it where they sacrifice another pawn and bring the light and dark square bishops out before the knights.
I usually play a different way against it . . . I go for the dragon set-up that I'm more familiar with. Anyone have any comments on this? I like going against it more than most variations, actually.
That could be a good idea, you'd just have to watch out for any attempts by white to provoke a weakening e6 move after this, which we as Dragon players know we don't want to play e6 with g6 in the opening. I don't know though, could 4...nf6 be more accurate than 4...g6 or is there some kind of trick with a e5 push like in the Smith-Morra?
I've already played 2 more Bowlder attack games since I posted this, and I won them both. I beat a higher ranked player than me using the Kan set-up against it and computer analysis showed I had equality by move four and a slight 0.24 advantage by move five.
http://en.lichess.org/analyse/r7tiy9zo/black
Of course being the patzer I am I wasn't able to use this slight advantage for anything like a GM could, and in fact, the small advantage fluctuated back and forth between me and my opponent for most of the game.
During the middlegame my pieces got walled off on the queenside, which is a common thing that seems to happen to me whenever I use this set-up against the Bowlder attack. I actually thought I was going to lose. Luckily I was able to find some tactical shots in the endgame to get an advantage, although I found the last tactical shot on the second move it was there. But it was still there when I noticed it and it was still good enough to win the game. I think I need to do about 1000 more hours of tactics training before I play again because basically every game I've played I've either missed tactical opportunities altogether or saw them on the second move.
Does anyone else find it really discouraging when you look at computer analysis of your games and see all the mistakes? I was playing someone over 100 points higher than me earlier and missed a checkmate in 2 I had, the game ended up being a draw. I remember on the Brooklyn Castle documentary one of the kids was crying because he missed mate in two, I can understand how that kid felt.
I dunno... the final position you give in post #2 looks pretty nice for black.
That's what's considered "the main line", at least I read a years old post from a >2000 player saying that. it's predicated on white playing 3. nc3 though, and often after 2...e6 they're playing 3.a3 preparing to withdraw the bishop to this little alcove, or 3.nf3 preparing to castle. And the few times I've actually gotten into the position of 3. nc3 nf6 4. e5 d5 instead of doing the piece exchanges white has captured the d pawn en passant, which I assume must be ever worse for white since it deviates from "the main line", though I wouldn't know. Why do you say that final position in the second post looks nice for black?
Oct 8, 2013
0
#11
Am amazed if there really is no book out already. The Bowlder has been so popular on the internet for the last 10 years or more. There must be some reaspn for all the appeal it has gathered. I just assumed some GM had put out a book, and everybody jumped on board. In my mind, 2.Bc4 has been mainline Sicilian for some time now.
I checked Amazon before posting and found no books on it. The Bowlder Attack is named after Dr. Thomas Bowlder. Here's a game of him playing Philidor using the Bowlder Attack in 1783
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1540995
Now that I look at that game, Philidor's play against it gives me inspiration. It's kind of interesting that in Philidor's game his pieces got walled off on the queenside just as mine have a tendency to do when I'm using this same set-up against it.
Oct 8, 2013
0
#13
Hmm interesting
Maybe this could your big break to get into the publishing industry. You could be the next Jeremy Silman! Who knows?
Oct 8, 2013
0
#15
NM-Dale wrote:
I thought 2.Nf6 was the refutation of this opening.
Shhhh! Don't tell anybody! At least until our book hits the shelves.
=D
I don't know. I thought playing e6, d6 and saving d5 for later in the game was an ok way to play.
Oct 8, 2013
0
#18
You know the funny part? I even have players use the Bowlder with the black pieces, against my English!
No One Can Stop The Bowlder!!
Hopefully you will sell twice as many copies ...English and Sicilian players...
good thinking.
Well, the idea was for someone who's actually good at chess to write the book on it. I doubt I could do it since I'm still new at chess, though I could certainly try to contribute to such a book, I doubt I could be the main writer.
It would make for a good blog post from one of you higher rated and experienced players though. A nice, long blog post about the Bowlder attack and how black can smash it, similar to how I've seen some IMs do the "taking out the trash" series.
The Bowlder attack has become some common that such a comprehensive blog post (or book, but I think a blog post is more realistic) is needed, by someone who actually knows what they're talking about.
This is one of the more common anti-Sicilians I see. I just played four Sicilian games in a row (I won 2 and lost 2) where the white played 2. bc4 after 1...c5, and it's not just low rated players doing this it's happening up into the >2000 range, as past threads on this forum like this one http://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/why-have-i-been-encountering-the-bowlder-attack have attested to.
Because the Bowlder attack is rarely seen at IM/GM level, no one has bothered to write a book about it, and there isn't a lot of information on it. Thus I've been experimenting with different plans on my own.
Here's one of the games I won, where I figured I had a lead in development so I might as well castle queenside.
http://en.lichess.org/analyse/dkoajv3k/black
As a side note to this castling queenside strategy, I find that often in the bowlder attack after bringing my knight out to f6, white will then station his dark sqaure bishop at g5, creating an annoying pin against the queen and threatening to damage the kingside pawn structure. However, they will often do this before I've castled, and I remember what hicetnunc wrote that this allows you to start a pawn storm against your opponent and then castle on the opposite side which I have been doing.
Here's a game in it where I lost, granted it was my first game of the day right after waking up, and I usually need some warm up time to play my best.
http://en.lichess.org/analyse/9xk29edq/black
Also Lichess ratings are deflated so don't look at the persons 1382 rating and think he's a low rated player. White players of all levels up to 2000 and even above (as there are games here where GMs and IMs have actually played it http://chesstempo.com/gamedb/opening/2032) are using this, and it is very common at <2000 level.
It may be a theoretically "unsound" opening at GM level, but there have been books written about the Smith-Morra and Wing gambits which are also theoretically unsound at top levels. Why not a book for the Bowlder attack too? It's seen more often than either of those gambits.
I know that openings supposedly don't matter and you should just go by basic opening principles, but it would still be nice to have a comprehensive book on the Bowlder attack just to give people some ideas of the general themes and plans for black as this 2.bc4 move really is used a lot.
And if no one will write it, we all should join together and write it ourselves by starting a group "the bowlder attack analysis group", where we will do analysis and compare notes, and if not write a book on it, at least write a long article about it.