Steinitz Scotch: What the engines say...

I'm very keen on this for Black.

The argument in these forums was always that's it's no good because top players don't play it. I always thought it's a pity that it was never tested at the top level.

Well, Cofail generously agreed to try this out in an unrated engine game with me. Here's my take:

Cofail(White, Houdini1.5)

Rooperi (Black, Stockfish2.0)

The game ended in a draw, with unbalanced material. Although White had a lasting advantage, in the end he could make no progress.

I'm not sure whether a human player could defend as well as Stockfish did, but on the other hand I'm not sure a human player could maintain pressure the way Houdini did.

So, here's the game, please let me know: Is the Steinitz Scotch playable at top level?

I've played this OTB for a couple of years when I was younger, and whilst the ideas are interesting and surprising I now consider this opening bust. In my experience, most white players will get a superb bishop pair that you are unable to stop.

My instinct tells me that the Steinitz Scotch is not playable at the top level, but perfectly legit for the rest of us.

Looking through Barsky and the Palliser & Dembo dynamic duo, their consensus is that the quiet 10.Be3 is better that the 10.Re1 played by the engines. White develops naturally with Rb1 and follows with c4 later on with the intention of opening up the position. But then 9...a6 seem to them stronger than 9...Nf6.

I'd say forget the experts and play it. Steinitz scored 10/13 with it. Unless you're planning on busting Carlsen soon, the Steinitz Scotch seems a safe bet.

Hey, I'm probably(!) not gonna bust Carlsen where he knows the theory for 30 moves. So he'll just have to play against this too, like the rest of them....

I actually think that even at weaker levels, black is just asking for trouble by giving white the bishop pair, the iniative, and a far safer king just for a pawn. If white knows what he is doing, I think black will struggle.

I've posted this engine game to the Open Encyclopedia of Chess Openings (OECO).

REF: The Open Encyclopedia of Chess Openings is a place where chess enthusiasts, armed only with a passion for chess and commercially available chess software, can post their own analysis of chess openings.

Cool. Am I gonna be famous?

Black's position is passive, but structurally extremely solid, and his development isn't even that terrible. And white's pressure is hardly overwhelming. I would not mind playing that opening with black at all.

It's easy to say that white's position looks nice, but nobody can concretely say exactly how white is going to break through the defenses. They just look at the development and assume that those pieces are destined for great things, yet there are no clear targets. Of course I have never played this, so I can't assume anything here, positive or negative; black's game just seems like a long way from being refuted.

Stockfish and Houdini are at the TOPPEST level, they made it a draw! Unless you are talking about some grandmaster, but they might hold it, they use computers to analyze.

As far as practical chances go, perhaps it depends on the player. Some people might hate the idea of defending the black side for a long time, but on the other hand, if a white player is impatient, he might get very frustrated that he has such a "great position" and yet he is running into a brick wall. And any time he missteps and allows simplification, time is running out for him.

Looks like an interesting psychological dynamic this opening creates . If you like this kind of position as black, go for it!