It looks so bad it can't possibly be good

First : I'm glad to see a quite detailed post.
Second : I didn't call the comparison worthless, but variants.

I also don't think the position (the critical transposition) is a hell good one for white. I used to play french (french only) since 7 years, now variying with sicilian. Some things i still know

After having a short look at "Blatny - Stangl" i can say that 11. bxc5 is very careless and 12.d4 insane like the game continuation certainly shows (In fact the game seems to be already decided after 12.d4). 11.b5 is better and closes the position a little more

I don't like Blatneys idea (if it is HIS one) to mure the poor bishop with 5.d3. Call me hidebound, but Bb5 has to arise before d3, in every case. The bishop is almost worthless in this position and has to be exchanged with the strong Nc6 as long as this is possible, but of course only in reaction to black, forcing it. (Yesterday, just pushing some pieces on the board, i disliked blacks possibly open b-file after exchange ... hmm ... )

By the way, i don't know when this game took place, but Stangl is actually stronger then Blatny (about 100 points)

Unfortunately i don't have a database for researching on my own, but you know how it is. If you consider an opening to be good, play it 300 times in tourneys, beat grandmasters and maybe the mass accepts YOU as the author.

With the knowledge in this thread, how many time does one actually save if really playing 2.e5 ? And how much power it will cost black (psyche + calculation) ?

OK.  My idea behind 3...d5 is to offer white the French structure that he apparently wants.  I think white's best move is probably 4.exd6.  I don't think 3...d5 "lets white off too lightly," since it forces white to justify the French structure he is aiming for.  (Well, on second thought, maybe you're right alumbrado.  I thought about it earlier, but I didn't see anything that I considered to more dangerous.  I don't think the move is as bad as it looks.)  Even from a psychological standpoint (which I guess is the main reason for this post), I think this continuation is the most disturbing (unless I am missing an outright refutation), since it unflinchingly calls white's bluff.  A strong player will be able to take advantage of this situation, even if the French is not his main weapon against e4.  And if the player is weak, then why talk about the opening?

Ok, so you say this is not a French, and any comparison is "worthless."  (Anyway I said "French structure.")  Well, what should I call it!?  This not a completely new idea that offers original play.  2.f4 has been played against the French, and maybe it's ok, but black has an even better version here.

The position after 1.e4 c5 2.e5 Nc6 3.f4 d5 4.c3 usually arises in the c3 sicilian after 1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.e5?! Nc6 4.c3.  Ask any French player.  This is not good for white.  Maybe white can get equality.  I don't know.  Maybe it was a little strong of me to say that it was not "playable," but I just going by my own standards. 

But hey!  Blatny played it!

[White "Blatny,Pavel"]
[Black "Stangl,Markus"]
[Result "0-1"]
[Eco "B22"]
1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.e5 Nc6 4.f4 Bf5 5.d3 e6 6.Be2 h5 7.Nf3 Be7 8.0-0 Nh6
9.a3 Bg4 10.b4 Nf5 11.bxc5 Bxc5+ 12.d4 Bxf3 13.Rxf3 Ncxd4 14.cxd4 Bxd4+ 15.Kh1 Bxa1 16.Rh3 Qb6
17.Rb3 Qd4 18.Bd2 h4 19.Rh3 Rh6 20.a4 a6 21.Na3 Bb2 22.Nc2 Qxa4 23.Qb1 Rc8 24.Bd3 Nd4
25.f5 Rxc2 26.Bxc2 Qxc2 27.Qxc2 Nxc2 28.Bxh6 gxh6 29.fxe6 Bxe5 0-1

Quote:


I agree. Watch all the other positions in other openings in which white offers tempo just for getting the pawn to e5 like in the advanced caro kann and french.

Quote:


Of course white will at almost all costs prevent exf6. It's a pity that (almost) nobody brings up some variants to prove his (or her) statements. Variants are the base for such a discussion. I don't consider 2.e5 to be the best move played ever, but i don't consider it to be a weak move, too!

1.e4 c5 2.e5 Nc6 3.f4 g6 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Bb5 f6 6.Qe2

here we are, but where is a problem for white? I don't say i have a complete analyzed variant tree and publish it in pieces like sveshnikov (the money hungry bastard ), but for sure i have more than most of the people which look at it and just say "Don't like it, don't wanna think about it, don't wanna play it, it's weak"

So whats the matter?

I can follow you so far...

1.e5 c5 2.e5 Nc6 3.f4 d5 4.Nf3 Bg4

is obviously the strongest way for black, nevertheless white will not play 4.Nf3 but 4.c3 (that is stronger in my mind) for example ...

1.e4 c5 2.e5 Nc6 3.f4 d5 4.c3 Bf5 5.Nf3 e6 6.Bb5 Qb6 7.a4 Be7 with several ways to continue for white. Nb1 goes a3 (perhaps c2 later). the push d5-d4 is not to fear, d2-d3 just blocks good. d2-d4 is in the air etc.

positions with 1.e4 c5 2.e5 are not really comfortable for white, but the point is: they ARE playable. Another point is: the black player steps to the board, playing c5, having that sicilian stuff in mind, looks at the board five moves later and thinks "hell what's that". Yet another point: it is NOT french, it is similar but the pawn on d4 is missing, so variants that might fit to french are worthless here. Yet another point: in positions of that kind the positional feeling is much more important than the tactical = the "open" minded sicilian player will find himselve in a very very closed position. And yet another point: Many players don't consider d5 (or even Nc6) cause that leads away from positions they try to achieve. And at last this opening has a really great variety and is NEW. Not to forget that the loved early Nf6 by black will NEVER appear in such a game (the basic idea behind e5). So what's the matter   

I have completely underestimated 2 e5 by never considering it before.  Then again if someone is willing to play a game with it I could have a closer look. Still it can't be good can it?

I'd say it's playable because you have White, but I don't think it puts any pressure on Black to equalize.  I don't really understand why Black's ...Nf6 is so fearsome?