Has anyone ever seen this? It kind of piqued my interest, but I've never seen it before. Any help with ideas and variations would be appreciated. Thanks very much.

Regards,
Jeff

Andrew Martin offers some analysis over at www.chessville.com ; otherwise, I haven't looked at it very much.

http://www.chessville.com/instruction/Openings/Martin/Mar04a.htm

http://www.chessville.com/instruction/Openings/Martin/Mar04b.htm

I heard ones, that the b3 idea should be stronger after the moves

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3. b3...

This was also played in Triplois 2004 between Kashimdzhanov and Topalov (1-0)

However I do not understand what the possible drawback of 2....e6 could be.  ???

The best way to counter the b3 sicilian is to play a c5-d6-e5 pawn formation as black. After 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.b3 black has 'lost a tempo' though something like d6-e5 might still be playable.

Looking back I see we've discussed 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.b3 under at least 2 threads (http://altmax.com/cgi-local/cpf/YaBB.cgi?board=AntiSicilians;action=display;num=1058958021, and http://altmax.com/cgi-local/cpf/YaBB.cgi?board=AntiSicilians;action=display;num=1058785643) but I didn't see any with 2.b3 immediately which sorta surprises me (did I just miss it?).

Anyway, I actually think that this is a fairly dangerous that Black should take seriously.  The ...e5 type variations may be the best theoretically but are often difficult to play in practice against Whites King's Gambit type ideas with f4 (note sometimes White doesn't play this as a gambit, instead he plays Bc4(b5), and Ne2 and maybe 0-0 before f4).  Back when I was really looking into this I felt most of White's resources were underestimated.  The variation I found most troubling was actually 1.e4 c5 2.b3 e6 3.Nf3 d5! which isn't supposed to very good.  No doubt my analysis could be improved but it always seemed that Black could get good play in the usually resulting isolated d-pawn positions (at least Fritz always seemed to find a way).

Like Glenn Snow I was attracted by White's f2-f4 against the c5-d6-e5 formation and was never able to figure out how White must play against 1.e4 c5 2.b3 e6. This also stops me from playing 1.e4 e6 2.b3 and now not d5 3.Bb2!? (Réti) but 2...c5 transposing.

If you scroll down the page far enough you'll find several fairly heavily annotated games featuring 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.b3 at http://chessgate.de/training/training_kindermann/training_kindermann.html.  Even without knowing German you can get a lot from the variations given.

I've played this line off and on for many years, and I can't say that 1.e4 c5 2.b3 e6 has been much of a deterrent for me. The positions tend to be reminiscent of the Grand Prix lines with e6 and d5, and if black prefers a d6 set-up it looks more like a c3-sicilian.

The maestro in the 2.b3 lines is Tamaz Gelashvili, a +2500 GM from Georgia. he's been playing 2.b3 against every level of opposition for many years. - Nigel Short has also dabbled with it occasionally, but still gotten much more attention for it than TG...

Via the move order 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.b3 it seems quite respectable though GMs as white usually accept a draw within 20 moves against other GMs, but that is not unlikely to be a last round syndrome. One game that impressed me as a spectator was Luke McShane - Ole Jakobsen Politiken Cup 2003. Sure white is much higher rated, but Ole is well known to be very hard to beat...

The downside to 1.e4 c5 2.b3 is in my opinion neither d6+e5 nor the ...e6 systems (though Watson seems to think otherwise in Play The French 1-3), but the k-side fianchetto.

2...Nc6 3.Bb2 d6 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.f4 g6! etc was a depressing game for me in round 1 of my first Politiken Cup in ´98. I seriously underestimated my young Icelandic 1500 opponent - afterwards someone told me that Icelandic juniors are usually worth about 500 more, but since they only play each other most of the year their rating points stay within the group...

Anyway, one lesson from that game was that Nd5 and doubling black's f-pawns is definitely NOT the way for white...

Probably, white needs to enter something similar to a Closed Sicilian set-up with d3, as Nf6xe4 is an annoying move if you don't protect pawn-e4.

Yes I had forgotten about the games (blitz) where I had suffered when they adopted a Dragon (maybe an inaccurate name, but you know what I mean) setup.  I too had tried the Nd5 without any success (theoretically speaking).  

I wonder if White couldn't change his move order a little.  How about 1.e4 c5 2.b3 d6 3.f4!?, attempting to keep the long diagonal open as long as possible.  For instance, 3...g6?! 4.Bb2 Nf6 5.e5 looks like it should be good for White.  Maybe on 3...Nf6, White could try 4.e5!? answering 4...Nd5 with either 5.Qf3 or perhaps the gambit 5.Bb2 Nxf4 6.Qf3.  Keep in mind this is strictly off the cuff.  I haven't looked at any of this with Fritz.  

That Kindermann site is great - not only for the 2.b3 variation.

Interestingly Rowson's update (I liked Lane but this update was quite good and I look forward to Rowson's future updates -- he covered all 3 of my blitz chess anti-Sicilian weapons!) has 2 games on 2.b3.  One of these games features the ...g6 variation with White responding with Nd5.  I still don't think this (Nd5) is a good idea for White and that Black's play can be greatly improved on.

Rowson writes:


Quote:

I have to confess that I am a little afraid of this move and find it surprising that it has only become popular recently. I should also say that I have lost several blitz games on ICC against this move!

For the rest you'll have to be a subscriber.  :)

Since I don't know if it's been mentioned elseware there is a book (probably several years old if that matters) written by Tom Snyder (I think) on 2.b3 that contains games and analysis that might be of interest to anyone wanting to try this out.

I do not know, if it is anything, but Boersma in his 1983 booklet "Siciliaans-Flankopeningen" suggests 1.e4 c5 2.b3 d6 3.Bb2 Nf6 4.Nc3 Nc6 5.Bb5 Bd7 (a6 6.Bxc6+ bxc6 7.f4 g6 8.e5 Gurgenidze-Vitolinsj, Tiflis 1979) 6.f4
a)6...g6 7.Nd5 Bg7 8.Nf3 o-o 9.Nxf6 exf6 10.o-o "and White has an improved version of the 5.f4 line".
b)6...a6 7.Bxc6 (7.Be2 g6! again) Bxc6 8.Qe2 eventually followed by castiling queenside. An example is

Ghannoum,M (2192) - Ramaswamy,K [B20]
CAN-ch Closed Montreal (5), 24.08.2001
1.e4 c5 2.b3 Pc6 3.Lb2 d6 4.Lb5 Ld7 5.Pc3 Pf6 6.f4 a6 7.Lxc6 Lxc6 8.De2 e6 9.Pf3 Le7 10.0–0 0–0 11.Tae1 b5 12.d3 Db6 13.Kh1 c4 14.dxc4 b4 15.Pd5 exd5 16.exd5 Ld7 17.Ld4 Dc7
Here Fritz gives the queen sac 18.Qxe7 Rfe8 19.Bxf6 Rxe7 20.Bxe7 Re8 21.Bh4.

Quote:

Since I don't know if it's been mentioned elseware there is a book (probably several years old if that matters) written by Tom Snyder (I think) on 2.b3 that contains games and analysis that might be of interest to anyone wanting to try this out.

I saw that book on a german site a while ago, if I remember correctly it was from the late 70s and very thin, 20 pages or so. - Just compiling Gelashvili's games should give more info than that, unless Snyder has made a recent updated version...


Btw, I saw a live bliz game Short-Kasparov in Reykjavik one or two years ago, where white tried 2.b3. Lazily, I assumed I could wait for the game to appear in the TWiC download, so I didn't write it down. But it seems that it hasn't entered the databses... Anyone here who has it?

I had the name of the author wrong.  It was Robert M. Snyder (USCF master) who put out "Sicilian 2.b3 (Snyder Sicilian)".  He did indeed write an update in 1984 that included 30 pages of analysis and 75 annotated games in a 124 page book.  I don't know if it's still availiable anywhere.

As author of the SNYDER SICILIAN (1 e4 c5 2 b3) and after the urging of my readers for many years, I have provided completely updated analysis of the SNYDER SICILIAN in my fourth book in the CHESS FOR JUNIORS SERIES titled, MORE UNBEATABLE CHESS FOR JUNIORS. It is being released by Random House on May 10, 2005. It contains the most up to date analysis and the lines are much more extensive than my 1984 book.
You can get an autographed copy and preorder it at www.chessforjuniors.com.

It is a bit pretentious to call 1.e4 c5 2.b3 the Snyder Sicilian, as it has been played many times before 1984 - even in the 18th century.
What about this? 1.e4 e6 2.b3 c5 3.Nf3 a6 4.Bb2 Nc6 is a reliable defense. Kindermann recommends 5.g3, but I think Black has a good game after d5 6.exd5 exd5 7.Qe2+ Qe7 8.Qxe7+ Ngxe7 9.Bg2 Bf5! 10.Na3 o-o-o Lyell,M-Ghasi,A/4NCL-Div1 0304.
Also after 5.c4 Black can perfectly play d5!
Is White's queen's fianchetto harmless?

Perhaps, after 1.e4 e6 2.b3 c5 3.Nf3 a6 4.Bb2 Nc6, 5.c4 with the idea of 6.d4.  Of course this should still be playable for Black.

5.c4 d5! looks equal at least.

Are they a book on this line 2.b3 ?

Maybe after 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.b3 a6 4.Bb2 Nc6, White could try 5.Qe2!?

Welcome back, Glenn! It has been a while. 5.Qe2 has the disadvantages, that White cannot decentley transpose to the Open Sicilian anymore and has committed himself to the King's fianchetto.
5.c4 is probably the way to go; Spassky has played this against Wockenfuss in 1980 and 1982.

Thanks, I guess it has been awhile since I posted anything (computer and life problems that I'm working out) but I have tried to peek in from time to time.

Your'e probably right that 5.c4 is probably best but while I doubt too many people are getting really excited about 5.Qe2 is does have some good points.  Keep in mind this game from a much earlier post of mine.


Quote:

An interesting and probably important game in this line is:  Negulescu vs. Moldovan, 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.b3 b6 4.Bb2 Bb7 5.Nc3 a6 (5...d6 6.d4 cxd4 7.Bb5+ Nd7 8.Nd4 is good for White) 6.Qe2!? (6.d4 cxd4 7.Nxd4 Qc7 8.Bd3 Bb4 9.Ne2 Nf6 10.O-O Ng4!) 6...d6 (and now that the a3-f8 diagonal is closed White can safely play d4) 7.d4 cxd4 8.Nxd4 Nf6 9.O-O-O Qc7 10.g4 Be711.g5 Nfd712.Rg1 O-O 13.Qh5 Rc814.Bc4 Nf8 15.Nf5 Nc6 16.Nb5!!, 1-0, if 16...axb5 then 17.Qh6!!.  For complete annotations to this game get, "COOL Chess" by Motwani.

Of course Black in the current situation is more flexible but I wouldn't be surprised to see that Qe2 has already been played before, perhaps from a 1.e4 e6 2.Qe2 c5 3.b3 move order.  The fianchetto is fairly common continuation (if we can speak of anything common after 2.Qe2!?) and I doubt Black is usually in a hurry to play ...a6 here.

After 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.b3 b6 Kindermann recommends 4.d4 cxd4 5.Nxd4 Bb7 6.Nb5!? with interesting complications.
Another problem then: 1.e4 c5 2.b3 d6 3.Bb2 Nf6 4.Nc3 Nc6 and White has not done well after both 5.f4 g6 and 5.Bb5 g6. I must say, that I have not seriously looked at them yet.

Jon's latest update got me thinking. If 1. d4 f5 2. g3! is the best move, then perhaps 1. e4 c5 2. b3 is the strongest move on the board after all!

Would like to hear opinions on 2. b3 g6 (Short-Nielsen) which looks cute. :)

Hello,

 Looking at the preview of Jon's updates, the current thinking is 1.e4 c5 2. b3 is
more dangerous than, playing b3 on third move. This is because, the old recipe  of blunting bishop with e5, allows f4 attacks,  and weakens d5 square. Also, something like 1e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. b3 a6 is nothing much for white.
                        This is interesting, because kind of the opposite of what used to think. Will have to try it out, because not too sure what to play against 2.b3 now...

Bye John S

Tomas Oral also plays this line:

[Event "Calvia ol (Men)"]
[Site "Mallorca"]
[Date "2004.10.15"]
[Round "1.21"]
[White "Oral, Tomas"]
[Black "Davila, Carlos"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B50"]
[WhiteElo "2565"]
[BlackElo "2339"]
[PlyCount "43"]
[EventDate "2004.10.15"]
[WhiteTeam "CZE"]
[BlackTeam "NCA"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. b3 d6 4. Bb2 Nf6 5. e5 dxe5 6. Nxe5 Bd6 7. f4 O-O 8. Bd3 Qe7 9. O-O Nbd7 10. Rf3 Rd8 11. Na3 Nf8 12. Nac4 Bc7 13. Rh3 Bd7 14. Qf3 b5 15. Ne3 Rab8 16. Re1 Ng6 17. Qg3 Be8 18. Nf5 Qf8 19. Nxg6 fxg6 20. Rxe6 Rxd3 21. cxd3 Bd7 22. Ne7+ 1-0

[Event "SVK Cup"]
[Site "Trencianske Teplice"]
[Date "2002.03.30"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Oral, Tomas"]
[Black "Mozny, Milos"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B50"]
[WhiteElo "2542"]
[BlackElo "2387"]
[PlyCount "31"]
[EventDate "2002.03.29"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. b3 d6 4. Bb2 Nf6 5. e5 dxe5 6. Nxe5 Bd6 7. f4 O-O 8. Bd3 Nc6 9. Nxc6 bxc6 10. O-O Re8 11. Qe2 e5 12. fxe5 Ng4 13. Bxh7+ Kh8 14. Bf5 Bxf5 15. Rxf5 Bxe5 16. Qxg4 1-0

I was under the impression that the b3 Sicilian lines were much stronger after Black has committed to ...e6.  Apparently, this is no longer the consensus?

MarinFan wrote on 06/15/06 at 14:58:45:

Hello,  Looking at the preview of Jon's updates, the current thinking is 1.e4 c5 2. b3 is more dangerous than, playing b3 on third move. This is because, the old recipe  of blunting bishop with e5, allows f4 attacks,  and weakens d5 square. Also, something like 1e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. b3 a6 is nothing much for white.                         This is interesting, because kind of the opposite of what used to think. Will have to try it out, because not too sure what to play against 2.b3 now... Bye John S

If you think 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.b3 a6 playable for Black, then 1.e4 c5 2.b3 e6 3.Bb2 a6 is the logical choice. 4.Nf3 transposes and 4.f4 d5 nor 4.g3 d5 looks problematic for Black.
I do not understand the remark, that 2.b3 looks more dangerous than 2.Nf3 e6 3.b3. If the latter is innocent, than Black just can play 1.e4 c5 2.b3 e6 evt. followed by d5 too. Here it does not make much sense to me, if White does not play 3.Nf3 or 3.Bb2 followed by 4.Nf3.

Hello,

    Well, all I know for sure is the Semko/Delchev book makes quite a good case for
1e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. b3 a6.
             If having the possibility of f4 is not dangerous for black, then 1.e4 c5 2b3 e6 should be ok for him. Will have to try it and see.

Bye John S

MarinFan wrote on 06/16/06 at 09:06:33:

If having the possibility of f4 is not dangerous for black, then 1.e4 c5 2b3 e6 should be ok for him. Will have to try it and see. Bye John S

It isn't. The reason is of course, that Black will play d7-d5 (evt a6 first). This is already a hard nut to crack, if White has played Nf3 without f4. In that case he may have some hope for and edge, if he manages to play d2-d4 with play against the isolated d-pawn. A pawn on f4 instead of f2 then has wasted a tempo for a weaking of White's position.
1.e4 c5 2.b3 e6 3.Bb2 a6 (why not?) 4.f4 d5 5.e5 with a French type of position.

If this does not convince you, then there is also 1.e4 c5 2.b3 e6 3.Bb2 b6. This lead me to the conclusion, that White's best try is 1.e4 c5 2.b3 e6 3.Nf3 (to answer b6 with 4.d4 cxd4 5.Nxd4 Bb7 6.Nb5!?)

I tried 2 b3 a couple of times in the Freestyle event over the weekend, and I have to say that I now think it is less than nothing for White - I will send the games to Jonathan for his next upate. It was actually responsible for the one game I lost (albeit against the guy who won the tournament). :'(

Jonathan had not published an annotated game I sent him on the 2.b3 Sicilian.  It was played at the 2nd main open tournament (correspondence)  in the open section, in the 2nd of 3 rounds.

He made an interesting point--in this game White plays an early d4 and makes this an open type of position.  He said he felt like it belonged in the open sicilian section.  Maybe GM Kosten agrees, maybe not.  I don't know.  I played for ...e5 and then ...d5, but there were some problems to solve since it looked like White had a ready made attack against Black's  King.  White made some mistakes by underestimating a central break.  

But during my research and study I began to respect this opening and I do recognize it has some sting, especially if understimated.

[Event "October 2005 Open Main #2 Tournament"]
[Date "2006.01.10"]
[Round "2"]
[White "ulibear"]
[Black "BladezII"]
[Result "0-1"]

1. e4 c5 2. b3 d6 3. Bb2 Nc6 4. Nf3 e6 5. d4 cxd4 6. Nxd4
Nf6 7. Bb5 Bd7 8. Nxc6 bxc6 9. Bd3 e5 10. O-O Be7 11. Kh1
O-O 12. c4 Be6 13. Nd2 Nd7 14. b4 Qb6 15. a3 a5 16. f4
axb4 17. f5 Nc5 18. Bc2 Bd7 19. a4 Bf6 20. Rf3 d5

I think after this break, Black starts to claim some serious initiative of his own.

21. cxd5   cxd5

22. Bb3 Nxb3 23. Qxb3 d4 24. Nc4 Qc7 25. Rc1 Bg5
26. Rc2 Bxa4 27. Ne3 Bxb3 28. Rxc7 dxe3 29. Rf1 e2
30. Re1 Rfd8 31. Bxe5 Rd1 32. Bg3 Bd2 33. Rg1 Rxg1+
34. Kxg1 Be3+ 0-1