Why does everyone play the Bowdler Attack?

I'm also amazed by how many Sicilian players resort to the Bowel Attack.
The bishop can easily be blocked and attacked, causing it to lose tempi.

That brings the opportunity for a queenside avalanche which I found to be the most successful strategy against it.

I usually play the obligatory e6 but delay d5 for more tactical opportunities in the center.

But... it can be a playable system.

I’m more than happy to face the Bowdler Attack because white has far more potent options. I was curious and reviewing the line to see I’m scoring 78% against it.

Any early Bc4 move in the Sicilian in the style of an Italian game is generally not great for White (I won't say White is worse, but Black should equalize). That said, Van Foreest played it once against Pragganandhaa (I believe at Tata Steel earlier this year), although I cannot say that the outcome was decided by the opening.

What an extraordinarily ridiculous remark for a FM to make. 

Cmon...the London is known to make people deranged. The French defense was made specifically for this move....its not a uncommon to reaction to wish 1 e6 was not played to this.

The idea was recently played against me in the Sicilian and it was the engine move.....I had already played e6!

An early Bc4 against the Sicilian is one of the most studied and highly-regarded moves in the history of chess! It has nothing to do with "the style of an Italian game" other than being a common move to both.

2. Bc4 is only bad due to black being able to force it away with d5 gaining a full move in the process. If black plays 2. Nf3 d6, which he usually does then 3. Bc4 is a top elite level move. Black doesn't have much better alternatives other than to transpose to the sozin, which I know nobody is going to be dumb enough to try to argue that is equal for black 

#40
"do you think 3.e5 to prevent 3...e5 is a bad move?"
++ Yes, 3 e5 is bad. It does not bring any piece into play, so it is loss of time.
Black does not want to play ...e5, black wants to play ...d5.
3 e5 does not prevent 3...d5. 4 exd6 e.p. just trades 3 moves e4-e5-exd6 for 1 move ...d5 and so is loss of tempo.
You can either prevent ...d5, or allow it and move the bishop to b3 or to b5.

#43
"I cannot say that the outcome was decided by the opening."
++ The outcome is never decided by the opening.
Here is the game
https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=2211621 

@tigxc sorry, I wrote wrongly, I meant "to prevent 3...d5" you answered me anyway, thx

I really hate facing the Bowdler attack, I've recently used chess.com a lot to prepare for OTB chess and it is something no one plays in OTB chess, since OTB players at my level almost invariably know a real line against the Sicilian. Playing against the opening sometimes feels like a waste of time. I sometimes lose to it though due to lack of motivation to play against the line.

Okay listin the bowlder attack is garbage. Like dude when i am playing bulltet people use it and it pisses me off. Sometimes i do not have enough time to react so ya.

Bishop gets kicked  around by a6, b5 or e6 d5, which isnt ideal for white, but playable

i dont know what the big controversy is. They are some lines of the sicilian where bishop on c4 makes sense, but 2.bc4 commits the bishop too early which in turn means black can change his play to harrass the premature bishop move.

its not rocket science. Move equalizes for no good reason and is played mostly by beginners thinking piece placement in Double K-pawn openings would work as well vs sicilian.

Considering black is ok in english opening with playing Bc5, I don't see why it would be ridiculous with white.

But indeed, most playing it think they can play like 1.e4 e5, but its not an italian...

This sums it up about as well as I've ever seen it

Fisher also played somthing along the sort. He always liked to play bc4 some point or another in the scillian.

I wouldn't confuse things like Fischer-Sozin attack with the Bowdler. Completely different openings. The move order matters