Its bad because its supposed to be like scholars mate or like a trap that many players do not fall into so Its sometimes makes your potion bad
Why is Bc4 bad in the Sicilian if you're white?
Sort:
brown-icee wrote:
Its bad because its supposed to be like scholars mate or like a trap that many players do not fall into so Its sometimes makes your potion bad
No that is not true, they don't try scholars mating me, i am not an 800 rated person. I don't get how it would make my position bad
Black can play e6 and then d5, gaining tempo and disrupting white's center. The f7 square isn't readily targeted from that side until the black e-pawn advances to e5.
It's not a dreadful move, but the bishop is not ideally placed, for the reasons @Dsmith42 states. It's too early to say at this stage what its best square is, so 2.Nf3 is a better move, as the knight belongs on this square, while Nc3 is also OK, though it takes away the possibility of a Maroczy bind with c4. While you're not too bad after 2.Bc4, it could be argued that it is a psychological error, because you're sending a signal to your opponent that you don't know your openings, and that you are maybe a bit inexperienced, which could give them confidence.
It isn’t... depending on when you play it of course. It’s one of the main lines against the dragon in the Yugoslav attack, It leads to the Fischer Sozin (a line that still has bite to it), and so on.
Feb 21, 2021
0
#7
sometimes it can be bad because of black ganings tempo's attacking the c4 bishop like with ne5!
Feb 21, 2021
0
#8
little_guinea_pig wrote:
Batman2508 wrote:
sometimes it can be bad because of black ganings tempo's attacking the c4 bishop like with ne5!
I think the OP's talking about the Bowlder Attack (2.Bc4), which is a waste of time after e6 with d5 to follow.
oh yeah that opening it's really baddddd
black gains so much queenside space and playing that against a strong player is Like you want to lose
and as a Sicilian player it's fun humiliating those poor players, i almost feel bad for them.
Mate, I've been asking my self this ever since I learned how to Scholar's Mate people
Feb 21, 2021
0
#10
Phantom_Beast23 wrote:
Mate, I've been asking my self this ever since I learned how to Scholar's Mate people
fear not! know you know 
little_guinea_pig wrote:
Batman2508 wrote:
sometimes it can be bad because of black ganings tempo's attacking the c4 bishop like with ne5!
I think the OP's talking about the Bowlder Attack (2.Bc4), which is a waste of time after e6 with d5 to follow.
but what if you're playing the d6 sicilian? I don't want to move my d pawn twice.
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. Bc4 is a perfectly respectable line for White. Black can choose between e6-Be7 and g6-Bg7, but there is no refutation.
Well e6 or g6 will just allow 4. d4, where black has nothing better than cxd4 and you're into mainline Sicilian again. 3. ...e5 maybe? Seems more than a little hairy though after 4. c3 followed by 5. qb3 attacking the f7 pawn (knight can also jump to g5). Or even 4. d4 anyway 4. ....cxd4 5. Ng5 and black's two kingside minor pieces are still on their starting squares with an attack on f7.
Obviously not 3. ...Bg4 4. Bxf7 Kxf7 5. Ng5+
There must be some reason why white nearly always plays 3. e4 rather than 3. Bc4 ...
Nerwal wrote:
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. Bc4 is a perfectly respectable line for White. Black can choose between e6-Be7 and g6-Bg7, but there is no refutation.
Oh, I've been playing e6-a6-b5 when they play bc4
Feb 27, 2021
0
#15
It is not always bad, or at least it is not as bad as in Bowdler attack.
Now for the less bad example:
If you play 2. ...e6 Sicilian 3.Bc4 would pract6ically transpoze to a situation similar to Bowdler attack, so there 3.Bc4 is worse than after 2. ...d6.
Early Bc4 is inferior because Black can arrange their pawns in a manner that boxes up your bishop. After 1. e4 c5 2. Bc4?! e6! White’s bishop is blocked from anything meaningful. On top of that, Black may attack your bishop with tempo by e6-d5 or a6-b5 pawn maneuvers. The bishop becomes more of a liability than a well-placed piece, especially if Black aims to later expand on the Queenside.
Vialk wrote:
Early Bc4 is inferior because Black can arrange their pawns in a manner that boxes up your bishop. After 1. e4 c5 2. Bc4?! e6! White’s bishop is blocked from anything meaningful. On top of that, Black may attack your bishop with tempo by e6-d5 or a6-b5 pawn maneuvers. The bishop becomes more of a liability than a well-placed piece, especially if Black aims to later expand on the Queenside.
I see you just ignored every other post above yours.
I've heard many people say how bc4 is not good in the sicilian, but I see many people play it. Even the engine doesn't think it's that bad.