Aggressive Response to 4...Nf6 in the Scotch

At least 3 are 2500+, the majority are 2000+

Hey buddy, can you stop being a dick? Blackburne used to play this a ton, are you calling him a terrible player?

the parham is crap. your using a flawed database to support a pipe dream.  41% is worse than the Scotch line you were looking at that you claimed was bad.... at the VERY best it leads to an equal game for white which is essentially giving up the fight for an initative. 

The main games you are trying to use to prove your point were played by nakamura in online in blitz . he is one of the best, and argueably the best online blitz player in the world so he could win playing 1. Nh3 2. Na3.  the two times he tried it in a serious gameagainst opposition where he was the vastly higher player , resulted in 1 loss and 1 draw not the expected result,.. you can keep trying to point at crop circles, glowing lights in the sky and images of the virgin mary in pancakes but its all crap. Emotionally its hard to admit that something you want to succeed is a failure because you have made a committment to it. Just recognize that it is flawed and move on....

The line

you are referring to in the Scotch is called the Steinitz variation. it is... well under a theoretical cloud. I think its is refuted but its definitely a shocker if white isnt ready

This GM seems to play it the most often against strong opposition

How would you personally play against 4...Qh4, looking on a database it seems most common replys are Nc3, or Nb5. Both lines, black can usually take the e-pawn if he chooses, which he didn't in that game above.

I'm really done arguing about the Parham with you guys, I know you think it's bad, you know I think it's good, I'd rather just keep this about the scotch.

Scotch is a pretty good opening.

all notes are by GM Emms

Hmm I see, it's interesting how black can't castle (if he takes material), the Nb5 move is good. While we're on this, are there any other openings that don't allow Black to castle? This steintz variation is one, if black takes the material. I know naturally things like a Muzio or Fried Liver would'nt, anything else that doesn't involve large sacrifices, such as those shown above?

Do you understand that material is just another variable in chess? it is as valuable as the initative/developmen, weak squares, strong center, well posted piece, etc. your adverision to sacrificing material is holding you back from developing further as a player.

Several people have offered you advice. You seemingly are now just avoiding the facts presented to you in an attempt to try and prove your personal stance on a subject. There is NOTHING wrong with studying and playing the muzio or any other opening as long as you admit to its limitations. The ruy lopez and other openings are serious attempts at an advantage by white. But they are also advantages that strong players fight for because they know the basics. Play systems that are good for your level but also provide a base to build on. Admit to their limitations. I am very aware of the limitations of the italian game but i also taught it for 2 years to scholastic players. One who is now 1970 USCF. She doesnt try for fancy tricks but she can play a ton of solid and good openings. she can play at a good level , italian game, queens gambit, and as black the accelerated dragon, the taimanov, the king's indian,. the slav, the benko, the benoni, the queens gambit declined

All respected openings with respected ideas.

maybe one thing that your not getting is that openings are the platform for ideas. If you have a solid opening your access to multiple ideas(plans) is wider and more able to adapt to your opponents plans. A lot of the ide lines your looking at are aggressive and unsual but usually very limited in plans, its a one trick pony.players get enamored by some of the crazy games that arise out of a particular line and the flashy wins and traps but then you show them a line (like the above games) that isnt so glamourous but throws a wet blanket on their plans and they start the ride on the "yeah,.. but" bicycle. Pick something that is flexible and you dont have to grovel if your opponent does know the right plan. play an equal game... Ok thats acceptable to me. you cannt learn everything in a week , month or year. so playign something that is simple is fine and very practical. I teach the exchange french not because i believe in it but because there are better places to spend time. 

Would you really recommend the Muzio to a player? I cannont imagine that would be anywhere close to sound.

the muzio is interesting  but too crazy. the piece sacs are amazing and it teaches a lot about development and initative as well as proper defense.I am all for exploration its a blast to study and play in blitz. 

at your level i would pick the italian or scotch and play it for a minimum of 6 months pick a good opening as black for d4 and e4 and play those for 6 months as well. then start rotating them out every 4-6 months. the minute you start to feel comfortable its time to switch. If you dont like something that is known as good thats usually an indication of a weakness that needs to be addressed. 

another good learning experience is see what good players play against first round opponents in a large open with a rating differnece of 300-500 points. 

The Muzio is sound, and believe it or not, the mainline after 4. ... g4 by black. so It obviously  cant be that bad, also I would honestly play Nxc6 or Nc3 in the scotch after Nf6

the problem with Muzio is that black doesn't have to play 4 .. g4. He can, and should simply play Bg7, h6, d6 etc and with the extra pawn and some potential for kingside play he should be better.

probably, but a lot of Black players feel that white should be punished for his quote on quote mistake of weakening his Kingside, and giving up a pawn, but I disagree that its a mistake, I play the Bishop's Gambit BTW.

Muzio and double muzio are pretty fun openings when used in blitz! 

Yeah, but I wouldn't recommend them for more than a 5-minute time.

I know how the pieces are moving, and I'm pretty sure that giving them away isn't usually recommended either.

Well since you think throwing away pieces is good, I'm gonna have to start doing that more often. I'll become a GM farily soon.

Heh first the negative reviews on Schiller's opening books have made some fun reading. The best ever was GM Anthony Miles who wrote,  "utter crap."

The blunt point that Pfren is trying to make is that you dont understand piece coordination , how to improve your pieces and have them work as a team. The same could be said about any class player, to varying degrees, myself included. The point about playing X opening is that its related to a pawn structure,...the best moves in those positions are based on ideas and where pieces go to implement those ideas. If you mix plans then your lacking understanding...  

Look at the best coaches of all time and you have a wide range of styles from quiet, nonemotional on the sidelines to yelling, red faced screaming. Both types have created winning teams but not all of them have been the best for certain players. Pfren is an International Master, fact, he has reached a level that most of us will never achieve, fact. You might not like the message and prefer it more kindly stated but instead of being offended really examine what he is pointing out. Often the most concise statement is the most meaningful and accurate. 

Actually, I feel like pfren is just trying to be an ass at this point, which is cool, I'm an ass to tons of other players, so I don't mind.

Because they are very poorly written and a great number of them are essentially data dumps. He also co-wrote some books with IM Watson , whom I consider one of the best authors around, which I like. The "Big book of busts"  is one of my favorites. Not something for IM's but gives me a reference in dealing with the crazy stuff people play at the class level. It also shows how to come up with a plan to punish mistakes. 

That said I have heard from people he is a good coach 1 on 1