i don't know for sure. assuming 1 b3 e5 2 bb2 nc6 3 e3 is what you mean, a6 is not necessary. nf6 is useful whatever white plays or whatever black wants to do later. in the main lines black plays a6 only when the bishop is on b5 already and to me that means he doesn't consider bb5 worth stopping. probably because white can switch to something else where a6 is not so useful.
Nimzowitsch Larsen Attack

Thanks. kingminblitz119147. Don't know why the other comment posted like that. What I was saying was that I already played Nf6. I am going to anaylyze after the game (playing in a correspondence game and don't want to use computer). Just seemed like if I know what the plan is I should stop it. It is the line you mentioned. But as you say maybe Nf6 may be good regardless of what white plays and maybe Bb5 is not that big a threat.
okay, welcome. i used to play the 1..e5 and 2 ..nc6 line against the b3 opening but switched to 1..g6. just to get different positions. maybe you are still playing the game so i am not going to mention anything else. besides it is more fun if you discover the truth yourself, whether it be in the game or in the post-mortem.

a6 is often too slow or completely unnecessary in the Larsen opening. the line you are referring to (1.b3 e5 2.bb2 nc6 3.e3 a6) is actually playable although not particularly threatening for black.
usually white will continue in one of two ways. 4.nf3 tempting black to push e4 to strengthen his fianchetto, or 4.c4 which is a slower way of playing it although can sometimes, transpose to the nf3 line.
most reasonable lines in the larsen are equalish or a modest opening advantage at most. White is playing for interesting chess and not so much cutting edge first move advantage so its no surprise that the slow 3.a6 here is Ok but nothing more.
my personal way of handling 1.b3 ? 1....b5
I am curious in the main line after white plays e3 with obvious plans of Bb5 attacking Nc6, why not play a6 on move 3? This does not show as a frequent move on opening explorer? Main move is Nf6.