Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 
Topic Tools
Hot Topic (More than 10 Replies) Black against the Scotch (Read 3273 times)
kapovski
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 3
Joined: 04/04/20
Re: Black against the Scotch
Reply #15 - 04/04/20 at 17:46:47
Post Tools
Used to have a lot of fun against the Scotch, especially in the queen sac variation i made bold.
haven't checked this with the newest engines and software, but some interesting ideas are still there i think


1.e4 e5  2.Pf3 Pc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Pxd4 Lc5 5.Le3

[5.Pb3 Lb6 6.Pc3 Pf6 7.De2 (7.a4 a6 8.a5 La7 9.Le2 0–0 10.0–0 d6 11.Lg5 h6 12.Lh4 Le6=/+) 7...0–0 8.Lg5 h6 9.Lh4 a5 10.a4 d6 (10...Pd4 11.Dd3 Pxb3 12.cxb3 Te8 13.0–0–0 d6 14.Dc2 c6 15.Lc4 De7 16.The1 Le6+/=) 11.0–0–0 Le6 12.f3=;

5.Pxc6 bxc6 6.Ld3 (6.Lc4 Dh4=/+) 6...Dh4 7.0–0 Pf6 8.Df3 a) 8.Pc3 Pg4–+; b) 8.De2 0–0 9.Pd2 (9.Pc3 d5=/+) 9...d6 (9...d5!?) 10.Pf3 Dh5=; 8...0–0 9.Le3 a) 9.Lf4 d6 10.Lg3 Dh5 11.Pd2 Dxf3 12.Pxf3 Ph5=/+; b) 9.e5 Pg4 10.Lf4 Ld4 11.Lg3 Pxe5 12.Lxh4 (12.Df5 d6 13.Lxh4 Lxf5 14.Lxf5 Lxb2 15.Pd2 Lxa1 16.Txa1=) 12...Pxf3+ 13.gxf3 Lxb2 14.Pd2 Lxa1 15.Txa1 d6=; 9...Pg4 10.Lf4□d6 11.h3 g5!? (11...Pe5=) 12.Lg3 Pe5 13.Lxe5 (13.Lxh4? Pxf3+ 14.gxf3 gxh4 15.Kg2 Tb8 16.b3 Ld4 17.c3 Le5 18.Tc1 Kh8–+) 13...dxe5 14.Le2= (14.Df6 Df4 15.Dxf4 (15.Dxc6 Lxh3 16.Le2 (16.gxh3 Dg3+ 17.Kh1 Dxh3+ 18.Kg1 Dg3+ 19.Kh1 Dh4+ 20.Kg2 Tae8 21.Lc4 (21.Dxc5 Dg4+ 22.Kh1 Te6) 21...Ld4 22.c3 Dg4+ 23.Kh2 Tb8 24.cxd4 Tb6–+) 16...Ld4=) 15...exf4 16.Pd2=/+) 14...Df4=]


5...Df6 6.c3


[6.Pb5 Lxe3  B/0  0  7.fxe3 Dh4+  B/0  0  8.g3 Dxe4 (8...Dd8 9.Dg4 g6 (9...g5) 10.Df4 d6 11.Lc4 (11.P1c3 a6 12.Pd4=) 11...Pe5 12.0–0 Lh3=/+) 9.Pxc7+ Kd8 10.Pxa8 Dxh1 11.Dd6 Pf6 12.Pc3 (12.Pd2 Dxh2 13.0–0–0 Pe8 14.Df4 Dh6 15.Dxf7 Dxe3) 12...Df3=/+]

6...Pge7 7.Lc4

[7.g3 d5  B/0  0  8.Lg2 Lxd4 9.cxd4  B/0  0  dxe4 10.Pc3  B/0  0  Lf5 11.Pxe4  B/0  0  Lxe4 12.Lxe4  -0.22/15  0  0–0–0 13.Db3  B/0  0  Pf5 14.0–0  -0.09/16  12  Pfxd4 15.Lxd4  -0.13/17  0  Txd4 16.Lxc6  -0.08/18  10  Dxc6 17.Dxf7  -0.07/18  13  Dd7 18.Dxd7+  -0.11/17  10  Txd7 19.Tfe1 -0.05/18  16 ] 7...b6 8.0–0 [8.Dd2 Lb7 9.b4 Ld6! 10.0–0 Pe5]

8...Lb7 9.f4

[9.Pb5 0–0–0 10.Lxc5 bxc5 11.Pd2
a) 11.Da4 d5 12.exd5 Pxd5 13.Pxa7+ Pxa7 14.Dxa7 Pf4 15.f3 Dg6 16.g3 h5 17.Te1 h4 18.g4 f5 19.h3 Dc6;
b) 11.f4 Pa5 12.Pd2 (12.e5 Dg6; 12.Le2 Db6) 12...d5 13.e5 Db6 14.Le2 Pac6; 11...Kb8 (11...d5 12.exd5 Pxd5 13.Pe4±) 12.Da4 (12.Ld5 a6 13.Pa3 Pxd5 14.exd5 Pe5 15.c4=) 12...d5 (12...Dg6) 13.exd5 Pxd5 14.Lxd5 Txd5 15.Tad1 (15.Pc4 a6 16.Pba3 Pe5; 15.Pe4 Df4) 15...a6 16.Pa3 Pe5; 9.Pb3 Pe5 10.Pxc5 (10.Lxc5 Pxc4) 10...bxc5 11.Pd2 Pxc4 12.Pxc4 La6 13.b3 Lxc4 (13...Dc6 14.f3 0–0 15.Pe5 De6 16.Pd3 d6) 14.bxc4 Dc6 15.Dg4 Pg6 16.Tad1 d6= 17.e5 Pxe5 18.Dxg7 0–0–0; 9.b4 Pxd4 10.cxd4 (10.bxc5 Pe6 11.cxb6 axb6 12.f3 Lc6 (12...0–0 13.Dxd7 Tfd8 14.Db5 La6 15.Da4 Lxc4 16.Dxc4 Pg6©) ) 10...Lxb4 11.a3 La5 12.d5 0–0 13.f4? (13.Ld4 Dg6=/+ 14.Ld3 f5) 13...Dxa1 (13...b5 14.e5 Dh6 15.La2 Pf5 16.Lc5 d6 17.exd6 cxd6 18.Lf2 Dxf4–+ Shirov-Agdestein 1992) 14.Ld4 Dxd4+ 15.Dxd4 b5 16.De5 Pg6 17.Df5 bxc4 18.Dxd7 Lb6+–+ 19.Kh1 Tad8 20.Db5 f5 21.Dxc4 fxe4 22.Pc3 Pxf4 23.Dxe4 Tde8 24.Dc4 Pxd5 25.Txf8+ Kxf8–+]

9...0–0–0 10.e5

[10.Dd2 Dg6 11.Ld3
a) 11.b4?! Lxd4 12.cxd4 d5 (12...f5 13.d5+-) 13.f5 (13.exd5 Pxd5 14.f5 (14.Lxd5 Txd5 15.Pc3 Th5=/+) 14...Dh5ƒ) 13...Dd6□14.exd5 (14.e5 Dxb4=/+) 14...Pxd5 15.Lxd5 Dxd5 16.Pc3= Dd7 -0.25/22  1:14:00 ;
b) 11.e5 f5 (11...f6!?=) ;
c) 11.f5 Dh5= (11...Dd6 12.Lxf7 La6 13.Tf2 Thf8 14.Lb3 g6) 12.De1 f6=; 11...The8 (11...Kb8 12.Tf3
a) 12.b4 Lxd4 13.cxd4 f5 14.d5 (14.b5 Pa5 (14...fxe4 15.bxc6 dxc6 16.f5 Pxf5 17.Lxe4±) 15.e5 h5 (15...Pd5 16.Tf2 De6 17.Pc3+/=; 15...Tc8) 16.Pc3 (16.Tf2!?) 16...h4 17.h3 Th6 18.Tf2 De6 19.Dc2 Tg6 20.Tc1 Tc8 21.d5 Lxd5 22.Pxd5 Dxd5 23.Td1 (23.Lxf5 Pxf5 24.Dxf5 Tg3=) 23...Tg3 24.Te2χ) 14...fxe4 15.Lc4?! (15.f5 De8 16.Lxe4 Pxb4 17.d6 (17.Dxb4 Pxd5 18.Lxd5 Dxe3+ 19.Kh1 Lxd5–+) 17...Lxe4 18.Lf4 Pbd5=/+) 15...Pf5 16.dxc6 Dxc6 17.Le2 Df6 18.Td1! enige zet (18.Pc3 d5–+) 18...Pxe3 19.Dxe3 Dxa1 20.Pc3 Db2 21.Tb1 Dc2 22.Tc1 Db2=;
b) 12.f5 Dd6=;
c) 12.e5 f5=/+ 13.exf6 Dxf6 14.Pc2 Lxe3+ 15.Pxe3 d5;
d) 12.Kh1 The8 13.b4 Lxd4 14.cxd4 f5 15.d5 fxe4 16.Lc4 Pf5 17.dxc6 d5 18.cxb7 dxc4 19.De2 Td3-/+ 20.Lc1 c3 21.Te1 e3 22.a4 Pd4 23.Da2 De4 24.a5 b5 25.a6 c2 26.Pa3 Td1 27.Lb2 Pf3–+; e) 12.Pc2 Lxe3+ 13.Pxe3 f6 (13...Dh6!? 14.c4 g5 15.fxg5 Dxg5 16.Pd5 Dg7=) 14.Pa3 Df7 15.c4 g6 (15...f5!? 16.Pxf5 Pxf5 17.exf5 d5ƒ) 16.Pb5 a6 17.Pc3 f5 18.Pcd5 fxe4 19.Lxe4 The8 20.Tae1 Pf5 21.Pxf5 (21.Lxf5!? gxf5 22.Dc2 Pe7χ) 21...gxf5 22.Lb1 Pe7 23.Pxe7 Txe7 24.b3?! (24.Txe7 Dxe7 25.b4) 24...Tg8=/+ 25.Tf2 Te6 26.Tee2? (26.Te5) 26...Teg6 (26...Td6!-/+ 27.De3 Dh5) 27.Ld3 Df6 28.Db2? Dd6?=/+ (28...Dh4! 29.Lxf5 Txg2+ 30.Txg2 Txg2+ 31.Txg2 De1#) 29.Dc2 Dd4 30.Kf1 Th6!-/+ 31.g3 Txg3?? (31...Txh2! 32.Txh2 Txg3 33.Thf2 Txd3 34.Td2 Da1+ 35.Ke2 Th3 36.Txd7 Dg1–+) 32.Te8+ Ka7 33.hxg3+-

12...d6 13.b4 (13.Tg3 Df6) 13...Lxd4 14.cxd4 f5 15.d5

(15.Tg3 Df6□16.Dc3 (16.e5 dxe5 17.fxe5 Pxe5 18.dxe5 Dxe5 19.Pc3 Pd5-/+ 20.Tc1 Pxb4) 16...Pxb4 17.Dxb4 fxe4 18.Lc2 c5 19.dxc5 (19.Db2 Pf5 20.Lf2 cxd4-/+; 19.Dc3 Pd5 20.Db2 Pxe3 21.Txe3 cxd4 22.Tg3 h5=/+) 19...Dxa1 20.cxb6□Dxa2 21.bxa7+ Ka8 22.Lxe4 (22.Txg7 Dxc2 23.Txe7 Dd1+ 24.Kf2 La6 25.De1 Dd3 (25...Dxe1+?=) 26.Lb6 Tc8–+ 27.Dxe4+ Dxe4 28.Txe4 Tc2+ 29.Ke3 d5-/+) 22...Lxe4 23.Dxe4+ d5 24.Dd3 Dc4-/+)

15...fxe4 16.dxc6 Pxc6 17.b5 (17.Lc2 Df6 18.Tf1 Dxa1 19.Pc3 Db2 20.Tb1 Da3 21.Tb3 Da6 22.Lxe4  -0.06/20  18:44  (22.b5 Da5 23.bxc6 Lxc6 24.Tb2 The8=) 22...Pe5 23.b5 (23.Lxb7 Dxb7 24.fxe5 dxe5=/+) 23...Pc4 24.bxa6 Pxd2 25.Lxd2 Lxa6=) 17...Df6!? 18.Lxe4
a) 18.bxc6 exf3 19.Le4! d5= (19...Dxa1 20.Ld4 Lxc6 21.Lxa1 Lxe4 22.Pc3 Lb7χ) ;
b) 18.Tf1?! Pe7 19.Lc4 Pf5 20.Pc3 d5!=/+ 21.Pxd5 Lxd5 22.Lxd5 Pxe3 23.Dxe3 Txd5 24.Dxe4 Txb5 25.a4 Ta5; 18...Dxa1 19.bxc6 d5! 20.Lc2 d4 21.cxb7 dxe3 22.Dxe3 Dxa2=/+)

12.b4

a) 12.Tf3 Lxd4 13.cxd4 f5 14.Tg3 (14.e5 Pxe5 15.Tg3 Pg4 16.h3 Pxe3 17.Txg6 Pxg6 18.g3 Te6= 19.d5! Lxd5 20.Lxf5 Pxf5 21.Dxd5 Te1+ 22.Kh2= (22.Kf2 Tf1+ 23.Ke2 Pxg3+ 24.Kd2 c6–+) ) 14...Df7 15.e5 d6 16.Pa3 dxe5 17.dxe5 Kb8= 18.Lc4 Pd5;

b) 12.Pc2 Lxe3+ 13.Dxe3 (13.Pxe3 Kb8= 14.e5 f5) 13...f5=;

c) 12.e5 Lxd4 (12...f5!?) 13.cxd4 f5 14.b5 (14.d5 fxe4 15.Lc4 Pf5 16.dxc6 dxc6 17.Dc1 (17.De2 Td3) 17...Td3 18.Lxd3 exd3-/+) 14...fxe4 15.bxc6 dxc6 16.Le2 c5 17.d5□Txd5 18.Dc1□(18.De1 Pf5 19.Lc4 Td3–+; 18.Dc3 Td3 19.Lxd3 exd3 20.Dd2 Pf5–+) 18...Pf5 19.Pc3! Td3 20.Pd1□(20.Lxd3 exd3 21.Tf2 Pxe3 22.Dd2 Pg4 23.Tff1 Pxh2 24.Kxh2 (24.Tf2 Pf3+ 25.Txf3 Lxf3–+) 24...Te2 25.Dxe2 dxe2 26.Tf2 Df6 27.Tc1 Dd4–+) 20...h5 21.a4 (21.Tb1 h4) 21...h4 22.h3! (22.a5 h3 23.g4 Pd4 24.Lxd4! (24.Db2 Tb3 25.Da2 (25.Dd2 Pf3+ 26.Lxf3 exf3 27.g5 f2+ 28.Kxf2 De4–+) 25...Ta3! 26.Dxa3□Pxe2+ 27.Kf2 Dxg4 28.Ke1 Pd4 29.Lxd4□cxd4 30.axb6 axb6 31.Pf2□(31.Da4 Td8 32.Ta2 e3–+) 31...Dg6 32.f5□Df6 33.Pg4 Dh4+ 34.Dg3 Dxg3+ 35.hxg3 e3 36.Ke2 c5-/+ 37.Tf4 Te4 38.Txe4 Lxe4 39.Tf1 Kc7 40.Tf4 Ld5 41.f6 gxf6 42.Txf6 b5-/+) 24...cxd4 25.axb6 axb6 26.Db2 (26.g5 e3-/+ 27.Db1 De4 28.Lf3 Df5 29.Pb2 (29.Lxb7+ Kxb7 30.Da2 Ta3–+) 29...Lxf3 30.Txf3 Dd5 31.Pxd3 (31.Tg3 Td2–+) 31...Dxf3 32.Da2) 26...Kb8–+ 27.Pf2 (27.Lxd3 Dxg4+ 28.Kf2 exd3–+) 27...Te3! 28.Ph1 (28.La6 Lxa6–+ 29.Txa6 Tc3! 30.Da2 Dc6 31.Pxh3 (31.Da4 Dxa4 32.Txa4 c5–+ 33.Tfa1 Kb7 34.Ta7+ Kc6 35.T7a2 e3 36.Pxh3 d3–+) 31...e3 32.Da4□Dxa4 33.Txa4 d3–+) 28...Tc3!–+ 29.Tfd1 e3 30.Pg3 Tc2 31.Db5 d3 32.Lxd3 Tg2+ 33.Kf1 De6 34.Lf5 e2+ 35.Dxe2 Dc6–+) 22...Kb8 23.Ta2!

a) 23.a5 Pd4=/+ 24.Tf2 (24.Ta2 Pf3+ 25.Txf3 exf3 26.Lxd3 Dxd3 27.Lf2 fxg2-/+ 28.Pe3 De4) 24...Pb3 25.Db2 Pxa1 26.Dxa1 c4 27.axb6 axb6 28.Dc1 Dc6 29.Lxd3 exd3=/+;
b) 23.Lg4 Pxe3 24.Pxe3 Dd6=/+;

23...a5= 24.Te1! (24.Lxd3 exd3-/+ 25.Taf2 Dg3 26.Dd2 (26.Ld2 Te2–+) 26...Txe3! 27.Pxe3 Pxe3 28.Te1 Pc4 29.Dc1 d2-/+) 24...Lc6 25.Tb2 Lxa4 26.Lxd3 exd3 27.Pc3 Pxe3 28.Txe3 Lc6 29.De1 Txe3 30.Dxe3 Dd6= 31.Kf2 c4;

10.b4 Pxd4= 11.bxc5 Pe6 12.cxb6 axb6 13.Ld3 Pc6 14.f5?! Pc5 15.Lxc5 bxc5=/+; 10.Pc2 Lxe3+ 11.Pxe3 g5! 12.Dg4 (12.fxg5 Dxg5 13.De2 Pe5) 12...gxf4 13.Txf4=/+ (13.Dxf4 Dxf4 14.Txf4 Pe5 15.Pd2 P7g6=) 13...Dd6 14.Lxf7 Pe5 15.Dg3 Thf8 16.Lb3 Txf4 17.Dxf4 P7g6 18.Dg3 Lxe4-/+]

10...Dh6 11.Dd2

[11.De2 Lxd4=/+ 12.cxd4 Pf5 13.Lxf7

a) 13.Df2 d6 (13...Pxe5 14.dxe5 Dc6=/+) ;
b) 13.Dd3 Dg6-/+;
c) 13.d5 Pxe5; 13...Pcxd4 14.Lxd4 Pxd4 15.Dc4 Pf5 (15...Dc6!?=) 16.Ld5=/+ Pe3 17.Lxb7+ Kb8 18.Da6 Pxf1 19.Lf3 Dxh2+ 20.Kxf1 c6 21.a4 Dh1+ 22.Kf2 Dc1 23.De2 Dxf4 24.a5 b5 25.Pc3=/+; 11.Tf3 Lxd4 12.cxd4 Pf5=]

11...d6 12.Lxf7

[12.e6 d5 13.f5 (13.Ld3 Df6=) 13...Pxd4 14.cxd4 dxc4 15.Lxh6 Txd4 16.Kh1□Txd2 17.Lxd2 fxe6 18.fxe6 Td8ƒ; 12.b4 Lxd4 13.cxd4 Pf5 14.e6 fxe6-/+; 12.f5 Dh4 13.Tf4 (13.g3 De4) 13...Dxf4 14.Lxf4 dxe5 15.b4 (15.Le3 exd4 16.cxd4 Pxd4 17.Lf2 Pexf5) 15...Pxd4 16.bxc5 Pdxf5 17.Dc1 exf4 18.Dxf4 Td1+ 19.Kf2 Kb8=/+]

12...dxe5 13.fxe5 Dh4

[13...Pxd4 14.cxd4 Dxe3+ 15.Dxe3 Lxd4 16.Dxd4 Txd4=]

14.Tf4 Dxf4 15.Lxf4 Pxd4 16.cxd4

[16.Kh1 Thf8 (16...Pf3=) 17.cxd4 (17.e6 Pdf5 18.De2 Ph4 19.Pd2 Lxg2+–+) 17...Txf7 18.De2 Txf4; 16.Kf1 Thf8 17.e6 La6+ 18.Ke1 Pxe6 19.Lxe6+ Kb8 20.Dxd8+ (20.Dc1 Pg6 21.g3 Pe5–+) 20...Txd8-/+ 21.Lg4 Tf8]

16...Txd4-/+ 17.Kh1

[17.Kf1 La6+ 18.Ke1 Tf8 19.e6 Te4+ 20.Kd1 Td8 21.g3 Te2 22.Kc2 Pc6 23.h4 Pb4+ 24.Kb3 Texd2 25.Lxd2 Td3+ 26.Lc3 Lb7 27.Pd2 Ld5+ 28.Ka4 Pc2 29.Td1 Lc6+ 30.Kb3 Pd4+ 31.Kc4 Lb5+ 32.Kd5 Pe2+ 33.Ke5 Te3+ 34.Pe4 Lc6–+]

17...Tf8 18.e6

[18.De1 Txf4 19.Le6+ Kb8 20.Pc3 La6–+]

18...Tfd8 19.Lh5 Txd2 20.Pxd2 Td4 21.Lg5 h6 22.Lxe7 Txd2 23.Lxc5 Txg2 24.h3 bxc5 25.e7 Te2+ 26.Kg1 Txe7-/+






  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jonathan Tait
Senior Member
****
Offline



Posts: 489
Location: Nottingham
Joined: 07/11/06
Re: Black against the Scotch
Reply #14 - 11/15/19 at 08:18:09
Post Tools
MNb wrote on 11/14/19 at 15:13:46:
Yeah, that might be worth a try, though probably not in corr. games. Black can play it in two ways: play ...Kd8, grab pawn e4 and hope to survive White's quick development or allow the fork Nxc7+ and try to prove sufficient compensation. I remember (if my memory doesn't fail me) GM Paul Motwani discussing a game like that in Schaaknieuws. I can't find it though. It made me buy GM Lev Gutman's book on 4...Qh4 many years ago. Unfortunately exactly in the spectacular lines his analysis contains quite a few flaws. After 5.Nb5

a)5...Bb4+ 6.Bd2 Bc5 doesn't make much sense to me, while Qxe4+ 7.Be2 is not exactly my cup of tea


I think you have to take the e4-pawn – otherwise what's the point of ...Qh4 at all? Thus 5 Nb5 Bb4+ 6 Bd2 Qxe4+ 7 Be2 Kd8 8 0-0 Bxd2 9 Nxd2 Qf4 and so on. But yes, you have to want to play like this Wink
  

blog inspired by Bronstein's book, but using my own games: http://200opengames.blogspot.co.uk/
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2017
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Black against the Scotch
Reply #13 - 11/15/19 at 02:05:41
Post Tools
I never liked playing against the Scotch either. Theory says its equal but to me White has the better long term chances if he can survive the opening, I say survive the opening because in many lines in the Scotch white often lags behind Black in development but he does have the much better pawn structure. Personally I would rather have the better pawn structure but I also don't like to lag behind in development in Open Games. Tongue

I realise the above comments may not have been much help in offering a solution to your Scotch dilemma, but at least the issues have been clearly defined. Perhaps you could investigate the following line favored a lot by Kamsky, which I also think is reasonable for Black: 

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 Bc5 [The following is considered strongest by many 4...Nf6 5.Nxc6 bxc6 6.e5 Qe7 7.Qe2 but I find this line unintuitive and difficult to play with Black without extensive theoretical knowledge and command of the various subtleties. Then there is also that pawn structure issue I mentioned.] 5.Nb3! [The trendy and most promising move to my mind] Bb6 6.Nc3 Nge7!? 7.Qe2 [7.Bg5 f6 8.Bh4 0-0 9.Qd2 a5] 7...0-0 8.Be3 f5 with decent chances.

Hope that helps at least a bit.

  

The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Leon_Trotsky
Senior Member
****
Online


Кто был никем — тот станет
всем!

Posts: 499
Location: Barcelona, CAT
Joined: 08/11/17
Gender: Male
Re: Black against the Scotch
Reply #12 - 11/15/19 at 00:56:19
Post Tools
I believe that 4...Ab4+ is covered in a book by Kuljasevic. I forgot the title, but I remember that it was published by Thinkers Publishing.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Stigma
God Member
*****
Offline


There is a crack in everything.

Posts: 3107
Joined: 11/07/06
Gender: Male
Re: Black against the Scotch
Reply #11 - 11/14/19 at 23:06:11
Post Tools
The last couple of years there has been a surge of interest in 4...Bc5 5.Nxc6 bxc6!? (instead of what everyone used to recommend; throwing in 5...Qf6). You could look into that. Among other recent sources I think I saw some videos by GM Pepe Cuenca (connected to Chess24, but these specific videos may have been free).

Of course, you would also need to prepare for all of White's other 5th moves beside 5.Nxc6.
  

Improvement begins at the edge of your comfort zone. -Jonathan Rowson
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
katar
Senior Member
****
Offline


look another year went
by

Posts: 431
Location: LA
Joined: 09/21/05
Gender: Male
Re: Black against the Scotch
Reply #10 - 11/14/19 at 19:45:54
Post Tools
HgMan wrote on 01/19/19 at 19:23:41:
I don't like facing the Scotch. I'd happily face just about any other open game line, but I don't like facing the Scotch. It's not that it gives White an unquestioned advantage, but I can never find any way to unlock the position. If I can reach equality, I can't turn the tide. I find it's very difficult to register the full point against it—even against weaker opposition. In recent correspondence tournaments, I've opted for the Caro-Kann if my opponent had any record of playing the Scotch as White.

What to do? Is there a particular line that maybe invites a little more creativity? Or a way to dodge it? Or frustrate the White player? I've been looking at the ...g6 options in Dangerous Weapons, but can anybody recommend a plan?

What have you considered and ruled out?  I have always preferred 4...Nf6 and then retreating the knight to b6 rather than going Ba6 after White's stab with c4.  Nb6 seems to lead to fairly rational or intuitive positions, unlike Ba6.  Also, Nb6 invites the common error by White of playing b2-b3 too early allowing an immediate minority attack of sorts via a7-a5-a4 then axb3.  Black gets this somewhat frequently; if so, Black might be already clearly better due to White's huge dark-square holes on the queenside (b4, c5, even a3).
  

2078 uscf
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
ErictheRed
God Member
*****
Offline


USCF National Master

Posts: 2484
Location: USA
Joined: 10/02/05
Re: Black against the Scotch
Reply #9 - 11/14/19 at 19:40:45
Post Tools
I don't think 4...Bb4+ is best, but it's respectable and leads to different sorts of positions than 4...Nf6 or 4...Bc5, so HgMan should give it a look if he hasn't already.  Engines also seem higher on the move than theory does, and poking around with engines can lead to some interesting ideas that I don't know have been covered elsewhere.  Caveat that I'm not aware of a great source for 4...Bb4+ coverage.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
IsaVulpes
Senior Member
****
Offline


No.

Posts: 326
Joined: 12/09/07
Re: Black against the Scotch
Reply #8 - 11/14/19 at 19:06:50
Post Tools
Both the direct ..Nb6 and the ..Ba6 lines in the normal 4..Nf6 mainline seem to be doing well, both objectively and practically. Not sure why one would avoid them - I play the Scotch now and then, and those definitely are by far the least comfortable lines to face.

4..Bb4+ on the other hand I am very comfortable in as White; it mostly banks on a certain unfamiliarity factor, but at this point it's another mainline, so investing some time into it is definitely worth it, and then I never felt like c2-c3 is so bad a move that Black wasting an entire tempo on provoking it can ever be good.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ErictheRed
God Member
*****
Offline


USCF National Master

Posts: 2484
Location: USA
Joined: 10/02/05
Re: Black against the Scotch
Reply #7 - 11/14/19 at 16:23:59
Post Tools
I like 4...Bb4+, as played by Tony Miles (mentioned above).  I don't claim that Black completely equalizes, but the positions are much different than the normal Scotch main lines, and I'm more comfortable as Black here than in the main lines.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10460
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Black against the Scotch
Reply #6 - 11/14/19 at 15:13:46
Post Tools
Jonathan Tait wrote on 01/24/19 at 00:11:17:
try 4...Qh4 Smiley

Yeah, that might be worth a try, though probably not in corr. games. Black can play it in two ways: play ...Kd8, grab pawn e4 and hope to survive White's quick development or allow the fork Nxc7+ and try to prove sufficient compensation. I remember (if my memory doesn't fail me) GM Paul Motwani discussing a game like that in Schaaknieuws. I can't find it though. It made me buy GM Lev Gutman's book on 4...Qh4 many years ago. Unfortunately exactly in the spectacular lines his analysis contains quite a few flaws. After 5.Nb5

a)5...Bb4+ 6.Bd2 Bc5 doesn't make much sense to me, while Qxe4+ 7.Be2 is not exactly my cup of tea;
b)5...Bc5 6.Qe2 Nf6 7.Be3! Bxe3 8.Qxe3 looks promising for White;
c) To avoid this 5...Nf6 always has interested me. Some lines:
1) 6.Nxc7+ Kd8 7.Nxa8 Bc5 8.Qf3 (8.Qe2 Nxe4! with interesting complications) Re8 (Nd4 is better, but doesn't seem to equalize either to me) 9.Nc3 Nd4 10.Qd3 Nxe4 11.Nxe4 Rxe4+ 12.Kd1 d5 and we have a rare case of a GM producing three bad moves in a row: 13.Be3 (13.Qg3) b6 (Bg4+) 14.g3 (14.b4) Qh5+.
2) 6.N1c3 Bb4 is an improved version of line a).
3) 6.Be3 Bb4+ is normally reached via 5.Be3 Nf6 6.Nb5 Bb4+.
4) 6.Nd2 looks reasonable too.
  

The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
stockhausen
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing
so much!

Posts: 42
Joined: 01/19/19
Re: Black against the Scotch
Reply #5 - 04/08/19 at 21:17:08
Post Tools
GMTonyKosten wrote on 01/22/19 at 09:59:15:
bragesjo wrote on 01/22/19 at 08:52:32:
what do you play against Scotch Four Knights?

I noticed from Victor's column over the last year or so that there seem to be quite a few good lines for Black nowadays, even that Wei Yi - Vidit, S game from April 2018 is worth a look.


When you say "even that Wei Yi - Vidit, S game" are you suggesting that there's somehow something suspicious about that line? (8...O-O 9.O-O Bg4). I've started playing it recently but now you've got me worried
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jonathan Tait
Senior Member
****
Offline



Posts: 489
Location: Nottingham
Joined: 07/11/06
Re: Black against the Scotch
Reply #4 - 01/24/19 at 00:11:17
Post Tools
try 4...Qh4 Smiley
  

blog inspired by Bronstein's book, but using my own games: http://200opengames.blogspot.co.uk/
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
GMTonyKosten
YaBB Administrator
*****
Offline


Mr Dynamic?

Posts: 3090
Location: Clermont-Ferrand
Joined: 12/19/02
Gender: Male
Re: Black against the Scotch
Reply #3 - 01/22/19 at 09:59:15
Post Tools
bragesjo wrote on 01/22/19 at 08:52:32:
what do you play against Scotch Four Knights?

I noticed from Victor's column (https://www.chesspublishing.com/content/1) over the last year or so that there seem to be quite a few good lines for Black nowadays, even that Wei Yi - Vidit, S game from April 2018 is worth a look.
  
Back to top
IP Logged
 
bragesjo
God Member
*****
Offline


Long live the Nimzo Indian

Posts: 1602
Location: Eskilstuna
Joined: 06/30/06
Gender: Male
Re: Black against the Scotch
Reply #2 - 01/22/19 at 08:52:32
Post Tools
While I am no expert on open games, what do you play against Scotch Four Knights?
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
RdC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 865
Joined: 05/17/08
Re: Black against the Scotch
Reply #1 - 01/19/19 at 22:42:42
Post Tools
HgMan wrote on 01/19/19 at 19:23:41:
Is there a particular line that maybe invites a little more creativity?


The late Tony Miles rather liked the idea which goes 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 exd4 4. Nxd4 Bb4+ 5. c3. The Bishop then retreats to c5 or e7. While it might seem as if this loses a tempo, the ideas are to weaken the d3 square and block the c3 square from a Knight.

It's a line that's been around for 25 years, so regular players of the Scotch are likely to be familiar with it.

If you like attempting to grab material, there's the variation 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 exd4 4. Nxd4 Qh4
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo