What's the point of Nf5 in the Sicilian?

This is a position out of the Lipnitsky attack of the Najdorf Sicilian. Usually I play a4 the moment I see a6 but I like to mix it up with Bc5. After e5 I was always confused why the computer prefered Nf5 over Nf3. I understand that Nf5 allows the knight to control more squares and threaten capturing the g7 pawn with check if the dark squared bishop ever moves, but I always figured it would be bad for white if black traded their passive light squared bishop for my active knight, giving me doubled pawns and a lack of center control. Could someone better than me or more knowledge of the Sicilian answer this question for me?

Doubled pawns aren't always a bad thing by the way. But I know what you're talking abt. It gains kingside space but I'm not a big fan of it. You do gain the Bishop pair so that's another +. Those are the basics I'm sure someone better will come along and explain it better than I can

Pretty peculiar move I would definitely just play Nf3.

Yeah same here! Maybe stockfish doesn't like how the knight can't move forward? No clue.

Yeah sometimes I don't mind doubled pawns, but I feel like a pawn of f5 is pretty isolated and dangerous to defend and isn't that annoying for the opponent. Maybe the bishop pair really is that valuable?

(Note:6... e5 is already an inaccuracy by black. e6 is the only move that is possible in that position, leading to a typical Najdorf position.)

In giving up his light-squared bishop, black has severely weakened his light squares and given up his bishop pair. Black may seem to have central dominance, but he cannot really advance his pawns anywhere. He also lacks development, with only white's two pieces developed versus black's one knight. Black's dark squared bishop is also going to be very hard to activate.

After Bxf5 exf5 Qc8, white can (and probably should) give up his f5 pawn for a pretty large advantage in development. He could go, for example, Qe2, Be3 and 0-0-0, with a pretty large development advantage. Black is going to have a hard time castling anywhere as white's initiative is going to be pretty large on the kingside. Black, for obvious reasons, also cannot castle queenside. White can also eventually plan to occupy the gaping hold on d5.

Hope this helps!

(This might be a bit messy, didn't really organize everything)

I don't know the Najdorf at all, never having played it. However, it looks to me like the c8 bishop is black's good bishop and what's more, it could be useful in neutralising white's active bishop on c4. I personally think that almost any Sicilian where black has this pawn formation is potentially bad for black. That's why the Najdorf is so extensively analysed ... to find ways out, for black, which don't lose by force against careful, positional play by white.

I usually play variations where black has a6 and e6. They are more positionally sound and also, they don't allow Nf5.

if nf5 d5 wont work becuase of bishop captures or something i play this line myself and i prefer white in this position

I was thinking the same thing, f5 seems like a very odd square to have accepted double pawns on.

Thank you for your response, I do see how black could be venerable to attack despite having a good center, but couldn't black play Be7 then 0-0? Is it still too dangerous to castle kingside after white castles queenside? I figured the queen on f5 after taking the sacrificed pawn could help defend the pawn storm, but I could be missing something.

I understand that black light squared bishop may be useful in countering white's, but doesn't a6 already lessen the power of the light squared bishop? If black gets b5 then I think they will feel quite comfortable on the light squares despite missing the light squared bishop.