Markovich:  I did get the chance to play the black side of the Scotch in a simul with an IM yesterday.  I did OK for a while until "my rating kicked in" and I lost a pawn.  With the structural disadvantage inherent in the Scotch for black and a pawn down and about 900 points ratings difference, I succumbed.  While I did not get exactly crushed in this one, I did find it educational.    I also thought it was interesting that after all my talk about how strange the Mieses variation is, that the IM opted for the Bd3 line.

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 exd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nxc6 bxc6 6. Bd3 d5 7. Nd2 Bc5
8. O-O O-O 9. h3 Re8 10. Qf3 Be6 11. b3 a5 12. a4 Bb4 13. exd5 Bxd5 14. Qg3
Bd6 15. Qh4 Re5 16. Bb2 Rh5 17. Bxf6 Rxh4 18. Bxd8 Rxd8 19. Bc4 Bb4 20. Bxd5
cxd5 21. Nf3 Re4 22. Rad1 c6 23. Rd3 d4 24. Rfd1 c5 25. c3 Ba3 26. cxd4 cxd4
27. Rxd4 Rdxd4 28. Rxd4 Rxd4 29. Nxd4 Kf8 30. Kf1 Ke8 31. Ke2 Kd7 32. Kd3
Bb4 33. Kc4 Be1 34. f3 g6 35. Nc2 Bd2 36. b4 axb4 37. Nxb4 Be1 38. a5 Bf2
39. Kb5 Ke6 40. Na6 Kf5 41. Nc5 Bg3 42. Kb6 Bb8 43. a6 {Black resigns} 1-0

Isn't the Scotch Four Knights one of the first openings Russian schoolboys are traditionally taught?

Still as a patzer I find it quite surprising that the Scotch with Nxc6 get the nod by Markovich and others as a beginner's opening. White basicly ruins black pawn structure giving black a ton of piece play in exchange. And then they tell you to play the two knights as black... .

I dare to say that the Scottish with Nxc6 is not a good opening for a novice's development. 

"The fault, dear Sharpplay, is not in our openings, but in our chess understanding, that we are patzers."  Sorry, couldn't resist butchering Shakespeare to bring home the point made by matemax and Markovich.  Yes, I'm sure the Scotch is a perfectly good opening and that it's "strangeness" has much more to do with my lack of understanding than with the quality of the variation.  I'll play the black side against some people who are much stronger than me and see how they crush me.

If you cant find a plan its a good sign to work on your chess understanding. On way to get a better understanding of positions is to play it from the "wrong" site (eg in Internetblitz) - you see how you get crashed

Willempie wrote on 01/23/10 at 11:15:15:


Lest it got lost in the rest of the noise here, Willempie's comments are worth repeating.  The absence of a clear plan makes the Scotch more of a challenge and an ideal tool against weaker opposition or to catch an opponent out (with some preparation, of course).

sharpplay wrote on 01/22/10 at 14:34:57:

The problem with the Scotch (from a player's pov, not a theoretical one) is that while the game is open, you have none of the standard themes immediately. Unlike an Italian/TKD where f7 is a target (in the Scoth you often dont have a bishop on c4 and the knight on d4 is not ideally placed ofr an attack there), you also dont have the option of c3 and d4 anymore. Also unlike in an open sicilian d6 is not weak. And so forth. Basically there is the move e5 (which is difficult to judge when to play it), piece play (whatever that may mean) and dealing with d5.
That means that in the beginning it can be very hard to find a proper plan.

Zoo, thanks for your comments.  ChessMonkey, your comparison of the Ruy and Scotch is interesting and I have had those same thoughts.  It is one more strange aspect of this whole thing.  The Ruy is classified as an open game but it is typically much more of a closed and maneuvering affair than most 1 e4 e5 openings.  Yet, like you I am convinced that the Ruy is somewhat easier to play for white as a mid-level amatuer than the Scotch.  Despite the dense theory of many of the mainline variations, most of the Ruy variations for white seem to have similar themes.