Four Knights: Scotch | UNDERMINE the Opening Attack!
#fourknights #scotch #openingtactics
The Four Knights Game: Scotch Variation (1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. d4) is a pretty good opening for White. I had the Black pieces in this game and played against it, and this was a reasonable example of an approach you can try against an aggressive opening that you aren't familiar with.
The Four Knights Scotch is kind of like a slightly slower and more solid version of the Scotch Game, as clearly, both sides have their knights in the usual squares. And so, after trading pawns in the centre in the usual Scotch way (4... exd4 5. Nxd4), I immediately developed my king's bishop to the usual square (5... Bc5), putting pressure on White's d4-knight, and having potential vision on White's weak f-pawn. White naturally shored up the defence of the knight with (6. Be3) - that make sense.
At this point, I decided to immediately start trading things off. Simply, my logic is that the more complicated the tension is in the board, the less favourable it is for me as I don't have much experience in the line. I reasoned that even if this approach wasn't the most accurate according to the engine, it wasn't likely to be much worse, and defusing White's attack to enter a mostly balanced middlegame should be achievable.
We trade away one set of knights (6... Nxd4 7. Bxd4), and then, White, who may have similarly been unfamiliar with the position, was sucked into my flow and initiated trading one of their bishops (and hence the bishop pair) for my other knight (8. Bxf6 Qxf6). For White, this was a mistake as they lost the initiative and the trade sequence was advantageous for me as it ended with Black developing the queen [+1 → -0.5].
In the game, I had a sense that I was now ahead in the exchange, so I decided to capitalise on this and used the opportunity to liquidate White's remaining developed pieces (9... Bxc3+ 10. Qxc3 Qxc3+ 11. bxc3 O-O).
I castled first, and we entered the middlegame in exactly the way I wanted! White had the slightest of advantage in development but had a damaged pawn structure. Stockfish gave the evaluation at [-1] and thus concurred that I was ahead.
By move 17, the bishops had also been traded away, and we entered a rook and pawn endgame. Stockfish believed that it was a draw, but the pawn structure made it easier to play for Black. This meant that I was able to capture the initiative more quickly, in the context that neither my opponent and I played the most accurately - rook and pawn endgames are tricky! I was the first to create a powerful tactical attack - both my rooks infiltrated White's second rank, and this gave me the edge. Stockfish could defend the position equally but for humans, mostly equal evaluations can hide significant asymmetry in terms of the difficulty to play!
On move 24, White cracked under pressure, possibly moving too quick and played (24. Rc1??). This was likely a mouseslip as it hung the rook (24... Rxc1+). Regardless, White opted to resign as the position was now impossible. GG!
The big takeaway from this game is that sometimes, an approach against an unfamiliar attack in the opening is to undermine it by trading away the attackers, even if it’s likely to be slightly disadvantageous. Often, you can make up for it in the middlegame!
