@ Markovich:

Yes, I think 5...Bf5 is strong also.  I simply chose to examine two lines that seemed promising after reading a post of Top Notch, a section of Larry Kaufman's repertoire book, and the article by Andrew Martin.  I think 5...c6 is sometimes preferred to avoid tactics based on the b7 weakness, and also it is a useful waiting move to see which setup white commits to.  Also, it is of some importance to Caro-Kann players from the black side.  Though certainly, it is useful to compare 5...Bf5 to 5...c6.  Not that I'll be starting a new thread on that anytime soon.  Maybe you will lead the way?

@ Rajmund Emanuel:

When I analyzed this line, I came to the conclusion that 10...Qd6 was the best move.  After 11.c4 Nf6 12.Bf4, I think 12...Qd7 is strong (this was the idea I was referring to in my last post), with the unusual plan of Na6-c7.  Black keeps his option open for castling to either side, while covering his weaknesses.  It may seem strange, but I think it is a constructive development.  I don't see a good way for white to counter this plan, though the position needs to be looked at a little further.  At the very least, I think it deserves consideration, despite its awkward appearance.

To make matters worse 9...Nd5...

1.e4 d5 2.d4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 c6 6.Bc4 Bf5 7.0-0 e6 8.Ng5 Bg6 9.Ne2 Nd5 10.Bd3

[10...Bd6 11.Bxg6 hxg6 12.Rxf7 Bxh2+ 13.Kf2 Nd7
(13...Nf4 14.Bxf4 Bxf4 15.Nxf4 Qxg5 16.Qe2+-;
13...Bf4 14.Bxf4 Nxf4 15.Nxf4 Qxg5 16.Qe2+-)
14.g3 N5f6 15.Qd3 Qb6 (15...Qa5 16.Bd2 Qf5+ 17.Kg2 Qd5+ 18.Qf3 Qxf3+ 19.Kxf3 e5 20.Kg2+-) 16.Rxf6 gxf6 17.Qxg6+ Kd8 18.Nf7+ Kc7 19.Nxh8 Rxh8 20.Bh6+/-

10...Qc7 11.c4 Nf6 12.Nf4! Bxd3 13.Qxd3 Bd6 14.Nfxe6+-

10...Qd6 11.c4 Nf6 12.Bf4 Qd8 13.Bxg6 hxg6 14.Qd3 Be7 15.Rae1 Nbd7
[15...0-0 16.Qh3 Nh5 (16...Nbd7 17.Be3 Nh5 18.Qh4 c5 19.g4+-) 17.Qh4 Nd7 18.g4+-]
16.Nc3 Nb6
[16...0-0 17.Qh3 Qb6 18.Nce4 Rfe8N (18...Nh5 19.g4+-) 19.Nxf6+ Nxf6 20.Be5+-]
17.Rxe6 fxe6 18.Nxe6 Qc8 19.Qxg6+ Kd7 20.Re1+/-

Yes, 12.Rxf7! complicates things a little.  Though maybe the same idea works with a queen move as you suggest.  I guess the idea of 10...Qd6 is to add protecttion to d6, but it seems to a little awkward, as you mentioned, when white play c4 and Bf4.  I wonder if black can get away with 10...Qc7, so that Bf4 can be met with ...Bd6.

Or at worst you could have a Zaitsev-like repetition 10...Nf6 11.Bc4 Nd5.  

In the 10.Nf4 line, I think black is fine as long as does he does not create targets for white, and prepares carefully to break in the center.  When looking at the positions here, it seemed that if white restrains himself with c3, then black should not be in a hurry with ...c5 (as it can allow white to take positive actions by placing the knight on d4).  The ...c5 break is more of deterrant against white's actions.  If white just sits still, then black can also adopt the idea of Rae8, Kh8, Nd7, f6, and breaking in the center with ...e5.  Black doesn't seem to have problems defending here.

10.Bd3 seems like the critical challenge to black's idea, so 10...Qc7 or 10...Qd6 need to be examined carefully (if black is not content with a repetition ).

Currently, my preference is for 10...Qc7, when I think black should be doing well.  (When I have the time, I'll post some analysis.)  Actually, when I first looked at line, I think I was deciding between 10...Bd6 and 10...Qc7, but I was unaware of the danger of 12.Rxf7 in the 10...Bd6 line.  So I think the general idea (countering with a check on h2) works, but I made an incorrect decision on which piece to use.

In the Alchemy Variation of the Ziegler Defense, I think I have found a move (9...Nd5) in the 8...Bg6 line that causes problems for white.  An important aspect of this move is that it seems to prevent white's plans, while avoiding immense tactical complications without an important stategic concession (such as the loss of dark-squared bishop in the 9...Bd6 line).  Here's my analysis of the move.  See what you think.

Alchemy - 9...Nd5!? [D00]

1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Nxf3 c6 6.Bc4 Bf5 7.0-0 e6 8.Ng5 Bg6

 9.Ne2 Nd5!
Has this move been considered?  I can't find it on Rajmund's website, yet the move seems very logical, in that it interferes with white's plans.  I don't see a convincing answer for white.  This move seems to avoid unnecessary tactical sequences, without unfavorably conceding the bishop pair.  With 9...Nd5, black argues that without a successful implementation of the Nf4 plan, white's setup is not so threatening.

 10.Nf4
 
[10.Bd3 Perhaps the most principled move to take advantage of the uncovering of f7, but black has a surprising resource. 10...Bd6!

11.Bxg6 hxg6

A) 12.Nxf7? Bxh2+ 13.Kf2 (13.Kh1? Bg3+ 14.Kg1 Rh1+ 15.Kxh1 Qh4+ 16.Kg1 Qh2#) 13...Qf6+! 14.Ke1 (14.Nf4? Qxf7 15.g3 g5-+) 14...Qh4+ 15.Kd2 (15.g3? Bxg3+ 16.Nxg3 Qxg3+ 17.Ke2 Rh2+-+) 15...0-0 16.Nh8 (16.Ne5 Bxe5 17.dxe5 Qg5+µ) 16...Qg5+ 17.Kd3 Nf4+ 18.Kc3 (18.Nxf4 Bxf4-+) 18...Nxe2+ 19.Qxe2 Rxf1 20.Qxf1 Qg3+ 21.Kd2 Qf4+ 22.Qxf4 Bxf4+ 23.Kd3 Bxc1 24.Rxc1 Kxh8-+;

B) 12.h3 12...Nf6 13.Nf4 Na6! 14.Qe2 (14.Nfxe6? fxe6 15.Nxe6 Qd7 16.Re1 Kf7-+) 14...Nc7 15.Bd2 Qd7µ followed by castling queenside]

 10...Nxf4 11.Bxf4 Be7

[11...Bd6?! 12.Bxe6 fxe6 (12...Bxf4 13.Rxf4 fxe6 14.Nxe6 Qd7 15.Qg4) 13.Nxe6 Qd7 14.Bxd6 Qxd6 15.Nxg7+ Kd7 16.Qg4+ This seems to lead to unnecessary complications, so I prefer 11...Be7.  Anyway the whole idea of this line is to defuse white's attack before it even strikes.]

 12.Nf3

[12.Bxe6 Bxg5-+;
12.Nxe6 fxe6 13.Bxe6 Bf6!? 14.Be5 (14.c3 Bf7 15.Bxf7+ Kxf7 16.Bg5 Nd7-+) 14...Bxe5 15.dxe5 Na6-+]

 12...Nd7 13.Qe2 Nb6! This move allows black to meet Rae1 with ...Bd6.

[13...0-0 14.Rae1 Nb6? 15.Bxe6!]

 14.Bb3 0-0 15.Rae1 Bd6 16.Bg5 [16.Bxd6 Qxd6µ]

 16...Qc7 17.c4

[17.Ne5?! c5

A) 18.c3 c4! 19.Nxg6 (19.Bc2 Bxc2 20.Qxc2 f6-+) 19...hxg6 20.Bc2 Bxh2+-+;

B) 18.dxc5 18...Qxc5+! 19.Kh1 Qxe5 20.Qxe5 Bxe5 21.Rxe5 f6 22.Rxe6 Bf7-+]

 17...c5 18.d5 exd5 19.cxd5 c4 20.Bc2 [20.Rc1? Bd3] 20...Nxd5µ It's probably best to leave the bishop on g6 to defend the f5 square if necessary.  For example: 21.Bxg6 hxg6 22.Rc1 b5 23.Nd4 a6-+ and f5 is defended.

Quote:


A1) - I'd enough agree. (perhaps even better: 18.Be5!?)
A2) - but I'd somewhat jar, after 17...Nd7 18.Ng5 Raf8 = I see only a equalization - the move 14.Bg5(?!) arrange a rate to development Be7!

Alas Rajmund has not incorporated my comments on 9.Nxf7 above.

And for Lev Zilbermint:
1 d4 d5 2 e4 de4 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 f3 ef3 5 Nxf3 g6 6 Bc4 Bg7 7 00 00 8 h3! yes, this idea is remarkable, but...
7.0-0 Bg4! is the very best continuation transposing to drawish Qe1 vs Nc6, Bg4 setup lines. It is a very subtle thing but it actually works for black. Would I play BDG in my corr. play, I will pick up 6.Bf4!? Long-Bogo line suggested by Rajmund here
http://www.mujweb.cz/www/rajmunde/ec_ena_bo.htm
For OTB chess, I would go for classical Studier Attack probably crushing my opponent in 30 moves.
Patrik