16 ( +1 | -1 ) 3. Bb5 in the Sicilian?Often when playing black I play the following: 1. e4 c5, 2. Nf3 d6 and then my opponent plays 3. Bb5. I assume this move is inferior to 3. d4, but is it? And if so, what is its refutation, if there is one?
21 ( +1 | -1 ) Its called the.....Nimzowitch Rosolimo Attack. I play it myself. My games usually go something like this: 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bb5+ Bd7 4.Bxd7+ Qxd7 5.0-0 Nf6 6.Re1 Nc6 7.c3 e6 8.d4.................... Another line that i might start playing myself sometimes is move 5.c4
19 ( +1 | -1 ) What about 3... Nb-d7?I usually play 3.... Nb-d7 with black, with the intention of playing a6 and try to force him to give up his bishop pair or, if he plays 4. Ba4, to play 4....b5 and gain space. Does that make any sense?
26 ( +1 | -1 ) Thisis called the Moscow variation, which has some major differences between the Rossolimo (1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5). These aren't 'inferior' to 3. d4, and don't have any refutation. 3... Nd7 intending 4... a6 is an interesting and sharp way to play it, but most people prefer 3... Bd7, which is safer. I personally favor the 3... Nd7 method.
38 ( +1 | -1 ) Inferior?I would not call this line inferior, that's a bit too harsh. I would say that 3.Bb5 is not the most critical move, which is of course 3.d4. The big advantage for us, amateurs, is the amount of theory. 3...Bd7 is, I think, considered the best move as the knight belongs on c6. But also 3...Nd7 is perfectly playable. Just play it if you feel the most comfortable then. The ideas you gave make perfectly sense.