Firstly, the Scotch does have the reputation of high number of draws (many exchanges, seemingly little advantage) as most of you pointed out. That's probably the reason why elite GMs don't ever play the scotch, at least, I could not remember seeing the Scotch in any recent major tournaments. However, it may be me, or just me, that finds the Scotch the one and only ideal(dream) position after 1.e4-e4 2.Nf3 Nc6...Let me explain.

Upon the fundamental opening themes, development, centre control ectera... the typical continuation plan would be to attack on the queenside(whichever non-castled side) and usually the qqueenside pawns want to be as mobile as possible. Looking at major good alternative positions(eg.1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc5 Ruy Lopez or even 3.Bc4(the name depends on what Black follows right?) and 2.Bc4 Bishop's opening. All these have the same flaws of hidering the queenside assault IMO. In the Ruy Lopez, the 3.Bb5 Bishop seems out of place, and why bother to threaten capture on the c6 Knight when the Black Knight is considered misplaced(Blocking the c-pawn, same idea of the Queenside advancement) The same things goes for either 2.Bc4 and/or 3.Bc4. Now I'm not condemning these famous, well established opening systems, I'll be an idiot to do so. But my point is that there are still characteristics or reasons why the Scotch is superior in some ways as compared to the other major popular alternatives. Not forgetting that 3.Nc3 Petroff's 3 Knights game is also suffering from this 'flaw'.

Also, if anyone still remembers the idea of not placing the Bishop out too early. If I remembered what I read a few years ago correctly, the reason to develop Knights before Bishops was that Bishops develop faster to any ideal squares that Knights. Not that I can fault it, but I think this reason even looks abit lame to me now. It simply takes one move to get to the Natural Knight position(Nf3 for 0-0's) and a minimum of 2 moves to get a Bishop onto another square! While the counter against this is that a Bishop can open it's scope within one move, my counter is that Knights don't even need 1 pawn move to open it's scope. Anyway, the bigger picture is that I feel the positioning values of the Bishops depend largely on the pawn formations, and moving the Bishop into action at the 2nd or 3rd move may be a premature act- they may be misplaced as pawn formations can still laargely change. Also, a piece out in action also suggests that it'll be traded off easier, which again, may not be what those "double Bishop" fanatics would agree upon.

Hence, I suggest 3.d4 to be the more 'idealistic move'. following 3...exd4 4.Nxd4, 4...Bc5 and/or maybe evem 4...Qf6 aren't really much of a concern... "alive play" can still be easy for White but the real counter is indeed 4...Nf6! highlighting the characteristical flaw of 1.e4(comparable to 2...d6 Sicilian, ie:1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6...)5.Nxc3 bxc3 White made Black produce doubled c pawns, but Black has practical chances with a open b file and the c8 Bishop has more options.

My first question is in many of the prior comments made, white sacrifices the pawn on e4 for quicker development with a different sequence from 5 on. Why couldn't white prevent the sacrifice with the sequence I have proposed? To me it seemed like the natural response for white. I'm actually interested in playing this sequence as black because black takes over the tempo here. I was thinking that black could respond with 6...Ne5 threatening white's Q and maintaining the tempo of the game. But white could 7. Qe3 Ng4 where black threatens Queen again. But perhaps this is poor development for black moving the same knight around chasing the queen while white has more pieces out. Maybe black could bring out the other night (Nf6)in the 6th or 7th move for better development. My second question is which do you think is better?

I think I have usually seen 4...exd4 5. Nxd4

Hmm, well, I suppose you have more oppressive control of the center, but the main problem of your game then is to maintain that center. About a month or two ago, I used to push my central pawns early, if I was playing white or black. My game felt unnatural if I had the pawns on their normal diagonals, close to my base. You can conviently cover pushed central pawns on d5 and e4 with the knight on c3 (as I'm sure you know), and it is similar on the other side. This leads to only one solid defender, which may become pinned, and the pawn center degraded by moves like c6 on a d5 pawn, f5 on a e4 pawn, etc. I used to be even more agressive than I was now, by pushing these pawns so impulsively, but I think that a simpler pawn center that you don't have to fret about the entire game is best. When you have a pawn controlling the center that is attached to the king wall (which is of course very strong), the center pawn is strong as well, even though it may not be pushing into the territory as much, it restricts ATTACKS on you, and helps you maintain defense by knight and bishop developments without worry of losing a central pawn.

Maybe I repeated myself, but is that helpful?

I used to play the Scotch as my second white opening (if I didn't feel like playing the Ruy Lopez), but now I dislike the awkwardness of the first two moves, like two kids that have been told to dance by their parents, it generally doesn't lead to a good dance/game.

BTW, as <Dudley> mentioned, the 4. d5 line is EXTREMELY rare (and 3..d6 is also)

Opening Explorer

I would say if it is so undesired by GMs, IMs, etc., don't play it.

Rather, in a 3..d6 game, you could play something like 4. dxe5 dxe5 5. Qxd8 Nxd8 (if he cares about castling more than the pawn) and 5..Nxe5, and since you now have usurped the center and he doesn't have very many agressive, developed pieces, regaining his central control will be difficult.

Opening Explorer

Surprisingly (to me, at least), that isn't played much either, but of the games it has been played in, it certainly wins a lot.

Here's a transposition game with the defense to 4. dxe5 as 4..Nxe5 5. Nxe5 dxe5 6. Qxd8+

G M Todorovic vs Velimirovic, 2000

Velmirovic was duped the same way as Fischer in Spassky vs Fischer, 1972.

It is definately a playable variation, but just not one that is trendy right now.

Hope that helps.

1.e4 e5
2.Nf3 Nc6
3.d4 exd4
4.Nxd4 Nxd4 I don't know Scotch theory very well
5.Qxd4 d6
6.Bc4 Be6
7.Bxe6 fxe6
8.Nc3 Nf6
9.O-O e5 thought about ...Be7 but thought 10.Qb4 would be annoying for my plan of ...O-O-O

10.Qa4+ Qd7 probably ...c6 over the board
11.Qb4 Qc6 to prepare ...O-O-O
12.Re1 O-O-O
13.Bg5! h6 willing to live with a backward pawn, but... 14.Bh4 g5
15.Bg3 Nh5
16.Re3 Nxg3
17.Rxg3 d5 I'd been waiting to play that
18.Qa4 d4?
19.Qxc6 bxc6
20.Na4 Be7
21.c3 an invitation to create a passed pawn, although not guaranteed

21 ...h5!? complicate things first
22.cxd4? exd4
23.Rb3? what's his plan? d3
24.Nc5?? 0-1

[Event "www.ChessWorld.net server game"]
[Site "www.ChessWorld.net "]
[Date "2007.1.9"]
[Round "NA"]
[White "darthplutonius"]
[Black "thevulture"]
[Result "1-0"]
[Termination "Black resigned"]
[WhiteElo "2064"]
[BlackElo "1355"]
[Mode "ICS"]
[DateLastMove "2007.1.15"]
[ECO "C45"]
[Board "3257576"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 exd4 4. Nxd4 Qh4 5. Nb5 Qxe4+ 6. Be2 Bb4+ 7. Bd2 Kd8 8. O-O Bxd2 9. Nxd2 Qg6

click for larger view

2 games in DB, with black winning both games: M Fleissig vs S Rosenthal, 1873 and J Wisker vs S Rosenthal, 1870

Seems though, black only have 2 pieces out (Q + N) and the a8 rook will have some problem developing, black is OK in this position.

Here's the game. Please comment and criticise as you see fit. I would like to know what White (me) and Black did right, and where they went wrong. Thanks.

1. e4 e5 2. Ng1f3 Nb8c6 3. d4 exd4 4. Nf3xd4 Nc6xd4 5. Qd1xd4 Ng8f6 6. Nb1c3 g6 7. Bf1e2 Bf8g7 8. e5 Nf6g8 9. Nc3e4 d6 10. Bc1g5 Bg7xe5 11. Qd4xe5 dxe5 12. Bg5xd8 Ke8xd8 13. O-O-O Kd8e7 14. Be2c4 Ng8f6 15. Rh1e1 Bc8f5 16. Ne4c5 e4 17. Nc5xb7 Ra8b8 18. Nb7c5 Rh8d8 19. Bc4d3 Ke7f8 20. Bd3xe4 Nf6xe4 21. Rd1xd8 Rb8xd8 22. Nc5xe4 Rd8e8 23. f3 Bf5xe4 24. fxe4 f5 25. c4 Kf8f7 26. e5 Kf7e6 27. Kc1c2 Re8d8 28. b4 Rd8d4 29. Kc2c3 Rd4e4 30. Re1xe4 fxe4 31. Kc3d4 e3 32. Kd4xe3 Ke6xe5 33. Ke3d3 Ke5d6 34. Kd3d4 c5 35. bxc5 Kd6c6 36. a4 a5 37. g3 g5 38. h3 h5 39. h4 g4 40. Kd4d3 Kc6xc5 41. Kd3c3 Kc5b6 42. Kc3d4 Kb6c6 43. c5 Kc6b7 44. Kd4d5 Kb7c7 45. c6 Kc7c8 46. Kd5c5 1-0

for years i've played 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 Qh4 but I'm trying to return to tournament play and i figure i should play something "safer" ;)> great to hear!! all the best!!