International Master Gary Lane runs a very informative, interesting, and entertaining column at ChessCafe.com called Opening Lanes, in which he answers reader questions about various chess opening variations.
In this month's column, he answered a question I posed, about the variations 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 e5 and 1.e4 c5 2.Bc4 e5. I was excited to see a titled player look at these variations, especially a Bishop Opening's specialist like IM Lane (Since 1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 c5 transposes).
You can read his analysis in PDF format.
I have been posting analysis on meeting Anti-Sicilians with ..e5. There were not many games to be found featuring this move, and very little freely available analysis. I already have surveyed 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 e5, and will return to this line in more depth in the future. I am also going into more depth with 1.e4 c5 2.Bc4 e5 (which could also arise from the Bishops Opening).
I may eventually pen a larger response to IM Lane's analysis, although I doubt there is much to be critical of (after all, he's hundreds of rating points stronger than I, and probably has more time and resources to boot!). That being said, after 1.e4 c5 2.Bc4 e5 3.f4, the only third move he analyzed for White, I would prefer 3…exf4 over either 3…d6 or 3…Nc6 (the options he covered in his article).
My analysis on 1.e4 c5 2.Bc4 e5 3.f4 will be posted in the near future, since it is anyway the next option in my series of 1.e4 c5 2.Bc4 e5 (It will be line D).
Please check out IM Lane's column, and let me know what you think!
(The pictures above are from Chesscafe.com; I claim no right on them, providing them only for aesthetic pleasure.)