The Bowdler 1.e4 c5 2.Bc4 ! >:(

Seeing Bc4 on the second or third move against the Sicilian makes me want to vomit. 

It's not the opening - it's the player who chooses this opening. They often only play the same moves every time, very much like a London player. They rely on their tactical abilities and familiarity with the positions, and they just move pieces by rote until their opponent blunders. They aren't interested in a "new" game, these players just want to play the same game every time, and they take pride in every win, saying "see, I don't even have to think about this!"

So is that fair to the rest of us who actually wanted to play a thinking game? I mean, a Sicilian player is usually wanting an exciting and interesting game, as opposed to the Caro-Kann player who wants more security and spends the whole game counting every pawn. And really there's no reason for white to NOT play the Open Sicilian, other than personal taste. So this Bc4 player is saying from the start, "I'm not interested in a complicated game. I want to give blows and I want to parry blows until one of us  slips up." And my ADHD simply can't handle shuffling pieces around the board for 30 moves just to see who slips up on move 31. When I played 1... c5 I did not want to wait 40 moves for the game to start. I was hoping for Opposite-Side Castling and edge-of-your-seat attacks from both sides, but instead I get both kings on the Kingside, and a silly shuffle of pieces in the middle. In the former, every tempi counted. In the latter, only patience counts as the players shuffle around in the center, often trading down quickly to a balanced endgame position. 

So just like the London, Black is able to achieve equality easily... which is the problem.

The middlegame of 1.e4 c5 2.Bc4 is just too boring! Especially after the best reply, 2... e6...

I used to play 2... e6 until I realized that it leads to the same balanced, sterile positions every time. The engines say "0.0", like 40 moves deep, for several moves.

So 20 moves deep into a Bowdler game, I am bored. Since online players LOVE this line, I end up playing it quite a lot, and I usually survive the opening "attack". But then, after several forced trades, I end up with an Open but dry position, and I start to fade out... I lose interest, and then WHAM! - The Bowdler player gets me with a tactic or trap I didn't know about - and ALWAYS near the endgame, where I'm usually staring at a screen full of pawns and rooks. Yawn. The game was already 35 moves, and now it will be another 50 if I care to play it out. Often I will have a better position going into the endgame, due to all the needless trades. But even when I win, it's just a long, boring game. 

I have tried to find ways of imbalancing the game as soon as possible, and there are only 4 moves which challenge white first-move initiative: 2...  e6, d5!, Nf6, and Nc6. 

Lately I have been using 2... Nc6, and then trying to avoid e6 if I can (because e6 locks everything up and a fire-sale of pieces usually ensues).  Today I lost a game to a blunder, which went like this: 

Same for me, I dislike the "anti-sicilians" a lot but encounter them all the time. There's tournaments with pre-set-up openings like the dragon or najdorf, at least that way you can try to avoid a boring game.

I remember when I first reached the skill level where a lot of my opponents had just discovered the Sicilian...this was mid 90s when the Sicilian was highly fashionable.  My first instinct was 2. Bc4.  Don't know why, blocking the advanced c-pawn with a developing move just feels natural to a player with no knowledge of the opening.  Just like 3. e5 feels natural against the Caro-Kann.

It's not bad for white at all, if white is comfortable with a maneuvering game it is perfectly fine. Not bad, just unambitious. 

It sounds like the Sicilian might not be for you. Even in the open lines, there are many variations  without opposite side castling or where black looks forward to good endgame prospects.  White  gets to decide if they want to enter the English attack, Yugoslav attack, Keres attack, etc

As a sicilian kan player, I'm always happy to face the bowdler because you get a6 and b5 in with a free tempo, or they have to play a4. You should remember that in most games white has more control over how positional or sharp the game will be, and you can't always force openings as aggressive as the dragon.

I agree with you that playing against the london system is infuriating since the people playing it are always braindead and you get the exact same game every time, and while the bowdler is somewhat similar it's objectively bad (or at least not good) for white, so I've never really minded it. I used to hate the delayed alapin with a passion, since I played d5 to transpose to a french (I play 2... e6), but those players always seem to just trade off the e pawns and then pin your king and trade all the pieces on e7. I recently switched to 3... Nf6 4. e5 Nd5 though and since then I'm always happy to face the alapin. 

It is bad, it gives away the whole opening advantage. Why is it not bad? 

The bishop's opening is an example of an opening that isn't bad. An opening like the Saragossa or Bowdler is bad. 

you can't compare 1. c3 with playing bc4, developing a piece, and preparing castling. It's not inherently bad by nature as opposed to moving the bishop's pawn up one square which literally does nothing

if everyone hates it so much then i should start playing it more often 

"They rely on their tactical abilities and familiarity with the positions, and they just move pieces by rote until their opponent blunders."  Sounds like a winning chess strategy to me.

Hahaha I just go e6 and d5 if Bc4... or c3 for that matter. I may not be able to get an advantage but I get to practice other openings and the game is different every time.

2. Bc4 does literally nothing either considering it will be forced to move again. It's basically a good move played prematurely, just like c3, which performs multiple functions in many openings. After e6 white has to try to prevent d5, and white keeps being forced to play moves and eventually the bishop loses a tempo anyway so there was no point in moving it in the first place. 

Why do you think no good player ever plays it?   

it's the only chess strategy i know.

white is playing to prevent the d5 thrust

Main Line ish

If black decides to push the a and b pawns he's just going to end up overextended on the queenside anyway, so it doesn't just lose a tempo by force

Okay I see you have no idea what you're talking about, forget it. 

huh?

Yes, the Bowdler is not played by grandmasters. It is dubious (check the analysis). The bishop gets kicked by d5. You are wasting a tempo. I play the Bowdler only if the opponent is rated <800. 

@Uhohspaghettio1 mind explaining how I don't know what I'm talking about besides disagreeing with your point?