Originally posted by Squelchbelch
Ok, fair enough.
I've played against this at least twice - I'll try to dig the games up.
I think after:
I would instinctively play
3...Bd7 simply because
a) 3...Nc6? leads to 4.Bxc6+...bxc6 which lumbers black with poor development & doubled c-pawns. ...d5 but again, that is just not for me - though I understand it is a reasonable response [/b]
I don't understand you. You're a 1600 player, no doubt a mediocre amateur, yet you talk like your an experienced master. I think anyone who asks for advice and listens to you will be lead far astray and be unable to follow their own ideas.
How can (dare) you mark decent chess moves with a ? and a ?!
"a) 3...Nc6? leads to 4.Bxc6+...bxc6 which lumbers black with poor development & doubled c-pawns. The usual Sicilian route of QS counterplay isn't helped here!"
Nc6 is a perfectly good move and if white takes the knight black has a perfectly reasonable position and possibility for central control. You're noob mind can't handle the thought of doubled pawns.
"b) 3...Nd7 blocks in your light-square B & just seems rather passive to me, with 4...a6 to follow kicking the Bb5 away."
Do you even understand why people play Nd7? People often play Nd7 unprovoked instead of Nc6 in the Sicilian to direct it to c5 or another better square. Do you understand ANYTHING about manuevering or ANY sort of positional chess? Do you even know that after an a6 by black white mostly trades off his bishop for the knight anyway?!
is forcing, obviously because it attacks Bb5, so white must either lose his active B by exchanging or move it away. Either case he is made to look rather foolish."
Again just absolute complete noobishly retarded talk. Bb5 is a perfectly correct opening and you're talking about it like it's a crazy gambit. Do you know anything?? How are you even 1600? Do you realize that the light squared bishop is the good bishop for black and white can exchange it off?? How is Bd7 forcing? What kind of analysis is that?
And even when Korch corrects your insane comments like a decent, experienced player would do, you come up with an even more ballistic comment.
"Aah, but would you recommend 3...Nc6 for a -1600?
I think they'd suffer because of the reasons I outlined earlier."
So basically you're saying that your rating, 1600, is the dividing line between good players and bad players. So anyone under 1600 has no merit to play Nd7 or Nc6? You just automatically assume your "reasons outlined earlier" are extremely correct? What kind of learner are you?
Then at the end, you say you're just recommending based on your own POV. What is your POV? Do you even know the ideas behind the moves before you mention your POV?? You say you liked a nice balanced position, but you don't like to play d5.
That's the biggest self-contridiction I've seen from you so far.
Go read a book or do something else because you're in no place to be offering ideas with your attitude to other players.