Michael Ayton wrote on 05/13/08 at 20:07:01:


Don't talk yourself down 
For the 10 ...Qe4 lines, Brunello-Prie and D'Amore-Prie are the games to look at. Wisnewki BTW mentions "13...Qb6 is also possible", something worth investigating.

In the 9.Bg4 line, 11 ...e6 is an idea, but there are others. Just found this: 9. Bg4 Nc2+ 10.Qxc2 Qxg4 11.O-O Qg6 12.Qa4 Qa6 13.Qxa6 bxa6 14.Bxa7 e6 15.Nc3 Nf6 16.Rfd1 1/2-1/2 (Yoos-Perez Garcia) which looks a safe way out for black.

[quote author=nmga link=1209856655/45#58 date=1210548500]In the 7 ...Bf3 line, does Prie analyse 10 ...Qe4? And what do you think of this? The games on ChessLive with this move leave me with several unanswered questions ...[/quote]

The line 7.Be3 Bxf3 8.Bxf3 Nxd4 9.Bxd4 Qe6 10.Be2 Qe4 is covered in some detail by Wisnewski, but it looks very hairy. I don't know Prie's analysis. However, in another thread realpolitik already raised another critical issue with Bxf3:

[quote author=realpolitik link=1183569483/120#128 date=1200527300]
1e4 Nc6 2d4 d5 3ed Qxd5 4Nf3 Bg4 5Be2 0-0-0 6c4 Qf5 7Be3 Bxf3 8Bxf3 Nxd4 9Bg4 (Christoph gives this a ?! but I dont think thats justified at all) Nc2+ 10Qxc2 Qxg4 110-0 and Christoph dismisses this line for white with the comment that after 11..a6 white is a pawn down without compensation. The more I look at this position the more I disagree with that assessment. As I mentioned earlier on this thread 12b4 seems to give white a nice attack and also worth bearing in mind is the game Dominguez- Matamoros which continued 12c5 Qg6 13Qc4 e5 14b4 Ne7 15Nc3 Qe6 16Qe2 Nf5 17Rfc1 Be7 18c6! and suddenly black starts to find life difficult and loses in 28 moves. Ok so black has improvements in the Matamoros game, but even then black has to consider 12b4 and other moves. All in all I think this position is not so pleasant for Black. Although he has an extra pawn, I dont think its easy for him to defend
[/quote]

Michael Ayton wrote on 05/10/08 at 18:42:05:


No worries!  Apart from the theoretical viability (or not) of the “Scandowitsch”, there is also the question of feeling comfortable with the very open battle between opposite castled sides. (Very rare BTW to see black doing the long castling!) High risk/reward situation. But there is nothing wrong with playing the safer 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 e5 Kevitz/Mikenas.
As to the situation after 13.Kd2, it remains unclear to me. I've looked at various options (13...g5 14.Be2!? g4!? or 13...Nd7!?) but would like to see more games than the short draw I cited. But if this variation is really a critical one I expect to see more games through the Scandinavian route in the coming years.

Hi linksspringer and many apols for the confusion! -- you are absolutely right about it being 6 ...Qf5!

The Hecht-R is looking in good shape to me, and Timoshenko's recent adoption of it is encouraging.

At the moment though, I'm a lot less sanguine about the "Scandowitsch" line that's the subject of this thread. The 4 ...e5 lines look to me rather dismal for Black, and I'd be worried here too about 10 Qe2 Be6 11 g3!?. Meanwhile after 4 ...Bg4 I'm not convinced Black has a line which sufficiently obviates the strategic White pluses TopNotch mentioned. The pawn sac lines are undoubtedly messy and no doubt White has to play very precisely to prove anything, but after 13 Kd2 does Black really have equal play? It seems to me Black badly needs ideas here (if there are any!).

linksspringer wrote on 05/08/08 at 22:51:04:


Yes- oops, I entered 5 d4 instead of 5 Be2 when the pawn is already on d4!

I have to admit I know very little theory on the line, but I've had plenty of exciting games with it with opposite-side castling and, where appropriate, launching the g and h-pawns.  I vaguely recall looking over some of the lines with Fritz, and finding an early Be3 and d4-d5 pawn push from White quite awkward to meet, with Fritz offering about +0.4 of a pawn's worth of advantage for White.

linksspringer wrote on 05/09/08 at 09:48:16:

17.b4 Ne4 18.Nxe4 dxe4 19.Rxd7 or maybe 19.Ng5 is even better.