Although even after 8.. d5 SF 14 thinks white can try 9 e5!?!? Nfd7 10 f4 Bh4+ 11 Kd2 g5!? 12 Qg1!? (or f5!?) gxf4 13 Bxf4 Nc6 14 Rf1 Ndxe5 15 Kc1

Something like that in one of the Dangerous weapons books iirc  

It doesn't think that's actively great, merely OK (and a little worse than exd5). Mentioned it as its such a massive turn around from the sort of ideas you got out of old school SF!

Of possible interest, the ECO-B2 which came out about two years ago has 6. Be2 e6 7. Be3 Be7 8. g4 d5 (instead of 8...b5 as in Esipenko-Carlsen) as leading to equality as in Nakamura-Topalov 2013. It also doesn't portray White as getting an advantage after 7...Qc7, e.g. after 8. g4 d5 9. ed5 Bb4 etc.

(7...Nbd7 8. g4 could lead to the "ancient" game Tseshkovsky-Browne, which I gather comes up in the Chessable course for White by GM Santos.)

Very little literature is published (certainly recently) on the Classical Scheveningen (Scheveningen with a Najdorf move order).

I realise that various publications have given Scheveningen positions via the Taimanov move order (Semkov's Taimanov-Scheveningen Hybrid & the Chessable course LTR Sicilian Taimanov, the Chessable course on the Najdorf gives the Scheveningen v the English Attack). 

Back in the early 90's when I started playing I used to really like the Najdorf-Scheveningen after playing through Kasparov's games v Karpov in the 80's and was popular right through the 90's. These days it is rarely seen.

I was wondering if it is the lines with 6 Be2 and an early g4 with 0-0-0 that is putting this line under pressure (i.e. the line that was used to beat Carlsen a few years back), has any antidote been found, or is it simply not worth the effort?

I ask as it seems all the other Najdorf-Scheveningen lines are in decent shape except this one, am I right or am I missing something here?