I'm curious here, something I haven't seen before (then again, normally whenever I play against the English, I try to play into the Symmetrical) in an Anglo-Indian in Game 2687786 (we're into the late middlegame, no comments on the game itself please, I'm just curious about the name of the opening for future reference so I can study the line) my opponent played the following very interesting response as White:
1.c4 Nf6 2.c5 ?!
Anyone know the name of this variation?
looks like it would have been way better with 3.d4 instead of d3...
I think it could be playable, white is grabbing space which could potentially waste a tempo if black can somehow take advantage of that extra development. Lets take a look.
I can't help you on the name of this variation.
1.c4 Nf6 2.c5 e6 3.d4 Nc6 4.Nc3 b6 5.Na4 bxc5 6.dxc5 Bb7 and white looks pretty silly, the knight is stuck far on the queenside. if white trys to avoid that with something like... 1.c4 Nf3 2.c5 e6 3.d4 Nc6 4.Nc3 b6 5.cxb6 axb6 and you still have a lead in development and now your rook can come out easily... otherwise, if white doesn't take on b6 you can win the pawn with bxc5.
At least, I think that is right. So, in conclusion, I'd say its a waste of tempo.
It occurs once in my database in an ICS game white had a rating of 2188 and black 1682. When black lost it was on time. White had two extra pawns and black was the exchange up. It looks like a blitz game. I don't think it has a name, I think white played it to confuse black in a blitz game rather than because of it's inherent merits.
In the ICS game black tryed 2. ... c6, I gave the position after 2. c5 to Crafty and it assesses the position at a search depth of 18 ply as -1.29. It gives 2. ... e5 3. d4 exd4 4. Qxd4 Nc6 5. Qe3+ Be7 6. Bd2 0-0 7. Nc3 Re8 8. 0-0-0 Bf8 9. Qg5 Re5 10. Qf4 a5 11. Nf3 Rxc5. It prefers 2. ... e6 at search depths of 11 - 13 and doesn't have 2. ... c6 as a best move. I think 2. c5 is bad and black probably gets a nice position from almost any sensible plan of development.
I doubt you'll ever see it again, so it's probably not worth putting any work into.