Anyone play this?

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nf6

I played it a couple of times in online games, when white usually automatically plays 3. d4, and then after 3... Nxe4 I'm just a pawn up But when white plays 3. e5 white should just be better. What can black do? 3... Nd5? Then 4. c4 and 5. d5 give white an enormous space advantage.

EDIT: Oops, 5. d5 is a bit illegal But like Perseus said below: 4. Nc3 should give white an advantage.

I don't play the Sicilian as black, and I've never faced that variation as white. Is it any good? What are the general plans? Anything interesting white should look out for?

--Fromper

Below are some lines and some reflections
Diagrams are at the end of the post so that they do not interrupt the pgn string (and so you can copy and paste the PGN without having to remove diagrams in between the pgn tags)

******* beginning of pgn-formatted game:: copy and paste the text below *******

[Event "Sicilian, Nimzowitsch variation"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Enter New Game"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "*"]
[PlyCount "21"]

1. e4 c5
2. Nf3 Nf6 !?
{This is a provocative line generated by Nimzowitsch
experiments. It is an attempt of improving upon Alekhine's defense, (in
Alekhine's defense, white can play d4 at move 3; here, instead, the occupation
of thecenter with PAWNS is harder for white)}
3. e5
{If white refrains from
advaning, Black shall play for the d7-d5 break, with or without the e7-e6
preparation: as usual, challenge the centre !}
Nd5
4. Nc3
(4. d4 {This is the
line suggested by De La Villa in his book "Desmontando la siciliana")} cxd4 5.
Qxd4 e6 6. Bc4 Nc6 7. Qe4 d6 8. exd6 Nf6 9. Qe2 Bxd6 10. O-O O-O 11. Bg5 Be7 (
11... Qc7 !? {DIAGRAM 1 The doubling of the f pawn is more than compensated by the
bishop pair, the g-file opened against white's king, that can be combined with
fianchettoing the Bc8 in b7}) 12. Nc3 a6 13. Rfd1 Qc7 {DIAGRAM 2 White is
slightly better here but nothing to write home about. The better player shoud
prevail})
4... e6
5. Nxd5 exd5
6. d4 Nc6
7. dxc5 Bxc5
8. Qxd5
(8. Bd3 !? {
DIAGRAM 3 Another De La Villa suggestion} d6 {Black cannot castle because of
the thematic h7 Bishop sacrifice. Hence, Black needs to be able to play his
Bc8 to f5 if white goes for the h7 sac.} (8... O-O ?? 9. Bxh7+) 9. exd6 O-O 10.
O-O Qxd6 11. c3 Re8 12. Qa4 Bd7 13. Qh4 white is slightly better here)
8... d6
9. exd6 Qb6
10. Bc4 Bxf2+
11. Ke2 with unclear play
{DIAGRAM 4 - This has been the main line for many years, but in
the last decade White is trying new ways, at least in over-the-board tourneys.
The piint is that, if you face a black player over the board, and you are white,
he is more likely to know well this line than you. Hence in live games, often
white deviates. In Correspondence chess, instead, this line is still being
played a lot, as white is not scared of being overrun just by the superior
preparation of his opponent.} *

******* end of pgn-formatted game:: copy and paste the above *******

DIAGRAM 1
If white exchanges of f6, black has plenty of counterplay thanks to the bishop pair, the open g file and rerouting the c8 bishop on the long diagonal hitting g2 on the open file.
The weakening of blasck's k-side pawns is difficult to exploit in the short run by White. White would need to bring a knight on h5 or to lift a rook to g3 or h3, but this will be difficult to achieve with black's bishop limiting the access to the 3rd and 4th rank


DIAGRAM 2
White has good development but black has no weaknesses. It's a game of of chess, no more a theoretical battle, whoever plays better shall prevail


DIAGRAM 3
White prefers a safe development, planning to play against Black's isolated pawn once the d7-d6 move is played. Indeed, this would be my practical choice.


DIAGRAM 4
A complicated position. Both White and Black want to attack. Black has no time for an immediate 11....Be6 (12.d7+ and 13. Qg5+ would follow) and white shall play 12 Ng5 on other moves. Theory used to call this position as better for white. However, it all looks quite complicated and one would need independent work on this.

It's a good variation. As good as any Sicilian in my book, though it's really a hybrid between the Sicilian and Alekhine defenses. There is a complicated Spassky game somewhere (Spassky as white if I recall) which produced a whole batch of theory on 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. e5 Nd5 4. Nc3. I've played the game myself on several occasions (amazingly, black keeps playing into it!). On the downside, if either side forgets something and slips, you can get creamed. There are other (simpler) ways to meet the Nf6 Sicilian.

3. Nc3, leaves black the choice, main line theory, Rossolimo or d6-d4-cxd4-Qxd4 territory.
3. c3 is solid as well, but you're going to have to put up more of a fight than in other Alapin lines. Actually, 2. ... Nf6 is a great try for a win against the (regular) Alapin. 1. e4 c5 2. c3 Nf6..

Thanks, you guys are a great resource. I might add it to my repertoire.

on beating the Sicilian shows the game Rhine-Sprenkle, which essentially refuted the opening.... It is a remarkable chapter in and of itself, and Rhine prepared the line for Sprenkle, an opponent he would have only normally had a small chance against in those days. It was the first piece of prepared opening analysis I have ever seen made specifically for one opponent (I'm not counting GM games), and I was impressed.

I analyzed the Nf6 Sicilian, and the main line we called the Boneyard Gambit after a Champaign-Urbana landmark, with to-be FM David Sprenkle in the 70s. We scored a lot of points with it, but a prepared opponent can play a simple line with a lasting advantage or try to refute it as in Nunn's book. I've tried for years to resurrect it, but I've just never found a way - although I remain convinced someone else might!

David Sprenkle played in the RSA Open (in about 1981, I think) and I spent some time with him - we were both nice guys!! A short while before the latest Informant had been published and the Rhine-Sprenkle game was in it.
I think that David was a bit disappointed and did not, as far as I remember, play the Nf6 line in the tournament.
It is amazing how long that analysis has stood up and not seriously been improved upon.

It was played in Dortum 2007 and I believe Leko was white. Black equalised quickly and considering that Leko is a pretty good player I think this variation is just as good as any other variation.