I still think 5...Bc5 is worth a look for those dissatisfied with the relative sterility of some of the lines arising from 5...Bb4.  I don't have Emms's "Play the Open Games as Black" on me at the moment unfortunately, but Abby Marshall's coverage is rather different to what I remember from Emms (6.Be3 Bb6 7.Qd2!? 0-0 8.0-0-0 with a very sharp game, I remember Emms had one line where White castled kingside and Black ended up the aggressor with ...g5).  I don't think Black equalises with as much certainty here either, though.

For a free resource, there's an Abby Marshall column on the Scotch Four Knights at ChessCafe:
http://www.chesscafe.com/text/abby10.pdf.  ;
It's written more from White's perspective than Black's, but you still might want to take a look.

The column focuses on 7...d5 but also mentions 7...d6 (as well as 7...0-0 which can tranpose after a later ...d6).

White often plays 8.Bg5 instead of 8.0-0 played in the Burg-Naiditsch game.  After 8...h6 9.Bh4 0–0 10.0–0 Re8 11.f4 Bb7 ECO (in 1995) gives 12.Qf3, but Marshall's column recommends that White play 12.Ne2 commenting "The knight moves over to the kingside for an attack, and Black's bishop is looking silly."

---

BTW: You can find the Burg-Naiditsch game annotated at:
http://www.thechessmind.net/storage/chess-posts/burg_naiditsch_2010.htm

Burg,T (2449) - Naiditsch,A (2691) [C47]
Deizisau GER, 14th Neckar-Open Deizisau GER (4), 03.04.2010

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.d4 exd4 5.Nxd4 Bb4 6.Nxc6 bxc6 7.Bd3 d6 8.0-0 Ng4 9.Be2 Qh4 10.Bf4 h5 11.Qd3 Qf6 12.Qc4 Bxc3 13.Qxc6+ Ke7 14.Qxa8 Bxb2 15.Rab1 Qxf4 16.g3 Qe5 17.c3 Nxh2 18.Rfd1 h4 19.Rxb2 hxg3 20.Qxa7 gxf2+ 21.Qxf2 Rh6 22.Qe3 Rh3 23.Qf2 Qg5+ 0-1

I didn't mean to point my "give up chess" remark quite as directly at the OP as it may have seemed that I did; my apologies.  I was trying to convey a more general sense.

According to Watson, Jan Pinski found a fairly promising line against 4...Bc5: 5.0-0 0-0 6.Nxe5 Nxe5 7.d4 Bd6 8.f4 Nc6 9.e5 Be7 10.d5 Nb4 11.exf6 Bxf6 12.Bc4 Qe7 13.Kh1.
http://www.jeremysilman.com/book_reviews_jw/jw_four_knights.html
I don't know of any refutation of 5...Bc5 (although it doesn't equalise with as much certainty as 5...Bb4- Watson merely mentions that White has some interesting play) so for now I would tend to suggest that line or maybe the 7...d6 suggested by Flig- I certainly wouldn't trust 4...Bb4.

It's worth noting that even John Emms (in his "Play the Open Games as Black") acknowledged that some players might not feel at home in the main line of the Scotch Four Knights, so the issue is known at GM level, hence his alternative suggestion of 5...Bc5 (although I do think the main line is objectively best).

Schroeder wrote on 05/10/11 at 22:20:50:


Has he also 5...Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Qe7 covered and what does he recommend? This has been played repeatedly by Nenashev/Graf and Godena and both are solid players.

Bruce Monson in "The Belgrade Gambit" devotes one chapter to the line 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.d4 Bb4 which he calls the Bogoljubow variation. In this chapter, he gives four annotated example games that he analyses in great detail.

With his recommended answer 5.Nxe5! he shows a convincing way to a White advantage. 2 years ago, I had the chance to follow his analysis successfully as White in an OTB game, and I definitely wouldn't be willing to play the Black side against a prepared opponent.