<3.e5! and now, please, no french transpositions.>
Why should White? My hero already played Nfd7 4.e6!
Indeed 3...d4 is critical, so I follow the debate with much interest.

Of course "+=" is adifficult symbol! I´ve just read about Petrosian preparing the QGA as black for the ´63 match against Botwinnik: according to Petrosian "+=" is a clear draw and even "+/-" should be draw with accurate defense! Only "+-" could be difficult ... 

There also seems to be different traditions of evaluating positions. For example, if you compare NCO with 1st edition of SmallECO (published at nearly the same time in 2000) not only in alekhine lines but throughout the whole book you´ll see SmallECO having new material in few variations and NCO crushing SmallECO tactically in even more variations. But 80 percent of different assesments are of that kind that both have more or less the same material but NCO writes "+=" and SmallECO writes "=" or "oo" !? (Personally in most cases I agree with SmallECO!). For further investigations we should start a topic "clash of chess civilisations" in the general section? 

Back to 1.e4 Nf6!

(1) Of course the endgame variation is no endgame but a queenless middlegame! It´s likely to become an endgame soon as it isn´t easy (for both sides) to avoid some piece exchanges. According to my understanding black should avoid pure rook endings and also pure minor piece endings (with one piece on each side), these would really be "+=" or even "+-" as the weakness of the black h-pawn would tell something. Black should keep at least one pair of rooks on the board and should exchange one or two pairs of minor pieces. Black´s aim is to use the g-file, to fix white´s kingside pawn and to keep his king in the center behind his pawns f7+e6 which may restrict white´s pieces. In these positions beetween middlegame and endgame (which Dworetky calls "simple positions") black should have equal chances regarding his dynamic possibilities.
After 8.0-0-0 Nc6 (8...Bg4!?) 9.Bb5 Bd7 (9...Bg4!?) 10.Nf3 I would prefer 10...Rg8,10...h6 or 10...a6 to 10...0-0-0 .

(3) Maybe 4.Nce2 d3 5.exf6 dxe2 6.Bxe2 is theoretically slightly better for white, but black can choose now between two totally different plans (exf or gxf) which are both not easy to play for black and white! Regarding the related caro-kann variations black is even a move down but on the other hand Be2 (and also Ne2 before Bd3) are rather harmless in those variations. And I know many 1.e4-players up to master level who don´t like the white side of the gxf-C-K !

(4) As I mostly play the variations (1)-(3) I have not really worked about 6.Nxd4 or 6.cxd4 though they are quite seldom played regarding 6.Nf3 . After a short view I must admit that it looks like "+=". Maybe I´ll return later to this.
Hector´s plan Qc2/Bb2... looks impressive but after 7.bxc3 Bg4 8.d4 I would call 8...Qd5 a mistake. Instead 8...e6 (as I wrote) and now 9.Qc2 Bf5! .
It´s not easy to analyse into the blue sky, White should develop quietly with 9.h3 Bf5 10.g3 Be7 11.Bg2 0-0 12.0-0 or something like that, I do not see problems for black.

(sorry for my bad english, for sure it´s horrible !?)

Now I must leave for Leko-Kramnik.

White can of course also play 3...d4 4 Nce2 Ne4 5 Nf3 Nc6 6 Nxd4, when not everyone believes Black has enough for his pawn after 6..Nxd4 7 Qa4+ c6 8 Qxd4 Qxd4 9 cxd4 Ng5 (maybe Hector's 10 Bd3 is better than the commoner 10 Bc4 now).

After 6 c3 dxc3 7 bxc3 Bg4 8 d4 e6 I think Hector's plan of Qc2, Bb2, Nc1 and Bd3 is dangerous (one game was 9 Qc2 Qd5 10 Bb2 g5 11 Nc1 000 12 Bd3: I don't say these were Black's only moves but he certainly needs some different ones; what did you have in mind?).

You might well be right about the 7 Qf3 pawn sacrifice: although you can see why Black players don't like taking it this has to be the critical move; otherwise White is just better.

I'd also be inclined to agree the endgame's not so much, after all one could point to Black's extra centre pawn. I'd have thought 8...Nc6 rather than an early ...Bg4 was the move, though. From my distant youth I remember the latter coming to grief rather horribly in a game of Shaun Taulbut's in some Scandinavian tournament.

I'd never heard of 4...Ng4 or 4....d3 which I rather like, although surely 5 exf6 dxe2 6 Bxe2 has to be a little better for White, don't you think?

I´ve seen the other thread about 2.Nc3 but there has been silence for some time and the last posts dealed with french or nimzowitsch transpositions. My topic is a more specialized one. Of course 2...e5 with a Vienna Game is black´s most solid choice (don´t want to discuss this again)  but I´ve always thought 2...d5 to be the most natural continuation. And a good one, too! 3.exd is rubbish (kill him on the d-file!) and I don´t want to spend time on 3.d4?, 3.d3 or 3.Qf3. Ergo 3.e5! and now, please, no french transpositions.

Let´s talk about 1.e4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 3.e5 d4:

(1) The endgame after 4.exf6 dxc3 5.fxg7 cxd2+ 6.Qxd2 Qxd2+ 7.Bxd2 Bxg7 8.0-0-0 is very interesting and I don´t know why everybody believes in Nunn´s "+=" from NCO. Black has interesting ideas of an early Bg4 and even Nunn´s mainline does not convince me. I´ve played this in some tournament games and in hundreds of blitz or rapid games and to my opinion good endgame skills count much more than the slightly weak h-pawn.

(2) The pawn sacrifice 4.exf6 dxc3 5.fxg7 cxd2+ 6.Bxd2 Bxg7 7.Qf3 should not worry the second player: take it and keep it: 7...Bxb2 8.Rd1 Qd4 9.Ne2 Qg4 10.Qb3 Be5! 11.Bc3 Qe6! is nothing to fear.

(3) Moving on to 4.Nce2 most sources simple ignore 4...d3!? Why? -
5.cxd3 Nd5 was evaluated "unclear/equal" by Bronstein and Bagirow and in practice it´s white who will face difficulties.
5.Nf4 dxc2 and now 6.Qf3 g5! is pleasent for black. After 6.Qxc2 black should also consider 6...g5!? because after 6...Nd5 white has nothing special but a forced draw with 7.Nxd5 Qxd5 8.Qxc7 Nc6 9.Nf3 Bd7! (9...Bg4? is very complicated but good for white!) 10.Qxb7 Rb8 11.Qc7 Rc8 12.Qb7 Rb8.
5.exf6 dxe2 is sometimes given as slightly better for white but the game is just beginning and everything can happen! 6.Bxe2 (6.Nxe2 exf6!?) gxf6 7.d4 (7.Nf3 Rg8, 7.Bf3 Nc6) Rg8 8.Bf3 Nc6 seems fully playable.

(4) If you don´t like this you can choose between 4.Nce2 Ng4!? , 4...f6 (I don´t like this) and 4...Ne4  which in fact transposes to 3...Ne4 4.Nce2 d4  (If you believe in the following variations but not in the endgame variation you should play 3...Ne4 as white´s derivations are harmless.
Avoiding some crushy defeats as the Rabiega game there seem to be no real alternatives to 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.c3 dxc3 7.bxc3 Bg4 8.d4 e6. This is claimed as "+=" and again I´m asking: why?
The position of black´s Ne4 looks suspicious but maybe it´s more strongthan weak?! It cannot be trapped as far as my programs can look (depth 23/50), a funny line is 9.Qd3 Nc5 10.Qb5?? a6 -+ .
Every attempt to play against Bg4 (h3/g4/Nf4) creates serious weaknesses. On the other hand white must develop his kingside. White has only one pure developing move (Bc1-e3), then he has to go into tactics.
There are few games and they´re often decided by tactical blunders. But as norwegian GM Gausel has played the black side (and won!) it should be okay.

I will continue to play 3...d4! until I know a refutation! Any ideas, chessfriends?