The 1.Nc3 move order is a tricky one for a lot of Sicilian players.  White can often hold back on playing e4 for quite a while and sometimes not play it at all.  If Black commits himself to holding back his d-pawn with (1.Nc3 c5 2.Nf3) 2...d6, White's Bf1 can find gainful employment on the h1-a8 diagonal for example, making Black's queenside feel a little uncomfortable.

The obvious answer is not to play 1...c5, but after 1...d5, 1...e5 or 1...Nf6 you have to be prepared for transpositions to other openings so I can understand that a lot of people will want to play 1...c5 and hope that White will play 2.e4 and take it back into a Sicilian.

It seems to me that plainly correct is (1.Nc3 c5 2.Nf3) 2...d5! when the reply 3.e4 d4 4.Bb5+ looks very interesting.

Incidentally, 1.Nc3 c5 2.g3!? is also quite interesting but I am in danger of veering way off topic ... 

This problem is even worse for the Najdorf devotee
facing 1.Nc3 and if Black tries c5 then 2.Nf3
and 3.d4.
On the GP-attack, my opinion is that Black's
life is not that easy after 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 d6 3.f4
even not in the early f5 gambits. But who am I?

In response to honeymade's suggested 7...d6
This is in fact playable as 8.f3 trying to transpose to a yugoslav seems to fail due to 8...Qa5 when 9.0-0 seems necessary

I played a game last week that went 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 and although I normally play the Najdorf, I decided to venture into the preferred 2...Nc6 in case White really did want to play some sort of GPA. Anyway, after 3.Nf3 I played Gallachers recommendation 3...e5 and although I lost, the resulting positions were very interesting to play.  His recommendation is from "Beating the Anti-Sicilians", which was published in 94. Anyone have opinions on this variation or the book ?

Thanks for the replies!

I haven't got either the Rogozenko book or Gallachers "Beating the Anti-Sicilians", but I seen on amazon.com that Gallacher suggests replying to 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 with ...2...Nc6 regardless and actually recommends the 3.Nf3 ....e5 line that I mentioned above. Against 3.Nge2 he also recommends 3...e5, but as honeymade suggested. this may not be as good (I think) due to 4.Nd5 d6 5.Nec3 and White has an excellent grip on the d5 square.

On the contrary, Rogozenko seems to recommend that Najdorf and Dragon players just play 2...d6 against 2.Nc3.

The option of playing 2...Nc6 3.Nf3 g6 4.d4 cxd4 transposing into the Accelerated Dragon without the Maroczy is interesting, but I think it is too much to add to my repertoire just to handle this type of transposition.

The last option is simply playing 2...d6 and White plays 3.f4 and tries the Bc4 lines with the pawn sac on f5. AmateurDragoneer quoted the Anand-Gelfand game which I am familiar with from Plasketts book on the GPA.  I agree that this line is probably not enough reason for me to made changes in the rest of my repertoire, but White can get a strong initiative and Black has to defend very carefully. One solution is for Black to try and 0-0-0 in these variations and I think I will try and examine this further. I will post some analysis later on, but in the meantime I'd be interested if anyone else has other more up-to-date suggestions on handling the f5 pawn sac lines in the GPA.

- Jim

Well, that's just the problem with playing the Najdorf!! (I know I'm going to get eaten alive for saying that). From a practical standpoint, there isn't much you can do. If you feel really awkward defending a classical sicilian on occasion (ie. play Nc6 anyway and if Nf3 or Nge2 followed by d4 then just play Nf6 and d6), then just play d6 and withstand the Grand Prix. While it may be preferrable to play Nc6 first and only d6 if White intends to transpose back to an open Sicilian, I seriously doubt having the pawn on d6 in the Bc4 lines is so dangerous that it warrants such concern. NCO gives 2...d6 3. f4 g6 4. Nf3 Bg7 5. Bc4 Nc6 6. O-O e6 7. d3 (7. f5!? Nf6 {7...exf5 8. d3 gives White compensation for the pawn, but not not necessarily a winning advantage. However, someone dying for a quick kill will certainly be upset at the "quiet" Nf6} 8. d3 d5 9. exd5 exd5 10. Qe1+ Kf8 11. Bb3 with an unclear position. This line is probably the one you're most interested in) 7...Nge7 8. Qe1 h6 9. Bb3 a6 10. e5 Nf5 as unclear. White's only chance at an advantage from here is an interesting pawn sac played in Anand-Gelfand, Wijk aan Zee 1996, but even that is not necessarily enough to give White an edge. Unless your opponent has some serious home preparation or a killer novelty waiting for you, there's no reason to be afraid of playing 2...d6.

Hi all

1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 , at this point White would typically indicate that he is going to enter either a Closed Sicilian with 3.g3 or (and this is my biggest concern) a delayed GrandPrix Attack with 3.f4 , but there is also the slight chance that this is a transpositional trick and White will play 3.Nf3 and 4.d4.

Currently I play 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 ... d6 in this position incase White does transpose to the Open. However - I would much rather play 2...Nc6 if I knew White was NOT going to enter the Open Sicilian. The reason being, that in the lines of the GPA with the B on c4 and where White plays f4-f5 quickly are quite risky for White if Black can play ...d5 in one move hitting the Bc4.  On the contrary, the GPA lines with the B on c4 are "quite good" for White if Black has played 2...d6 [ Plaskett describes this in his GPA book] and has to waste another tempo to kick the Bishop.

Anyway, I was considering the idea of playing 1.e4 c5 2.Nc3 and just playing 2...Nc6, if 3.Nf3 then perhaps 3...e5 ?! clamping down on d4 and then playing ...g6 and ...Bg7 to enter a sort of reversed Botvinnik system for Black. Does anyone have any analysis on this line for Black.

Thanks
- Jim