Moves: 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. Bb5+
The move Bb5+ is considered an Anti-Sicilian, and is the most commonly seen thereof. White develops his bishop with a tempo, enabling kingside castling, and may seek to develop rapidly along similar lines to the Ruy Lopez in order to meet Blacks later attack head-on, or simply to control d5 by playing c4 but, not wishing to have the kings bishop stuck behind the c4 pawn, exchanging it off first. However, Blacks own development can carry on unhindered and he tends to get an equal game - trying to sabotage the Sicilian this early on may be a cure worse than the disease.
Black has three replies, assuming no sentient being would block the check with the queen.
* 3...Nc6 leads to a Lopez-type setup in which Black has already played the useful c5;
* 3...Bd7 wins a tempo by compelling the exchange of bishops but gives White more options.
Originally posted by AThousandYoungOn top of that black's white square bishop will become very active. It can be dispatched out by two directions. These two advantages are too good to be ignored for black.
Even though your c-Pawns are doubled, the second Pawn is closer to the center than it was. You now have TWO c-Pawns to suppress the d-file with. Your center is very strong, and you have an open file, and you have the Bishop pair.
E.g. One c-Pawn keeps the White Pawn off d4, and the other supports your own d-Pawn's advance.
Originally posted by jb70So black tries to sac his queen on move 3,white refuses and instead sacs his bishop??
There is a game played 2007 between the French Grandmaster Fressinet Laurent(2650) and Van Wely Loek (2680) Grandmaster from the Netherlands.
Black played 3....Qd7
White played 4.O-O
Anyone know the story behind this game?