Aggressive Response to 4...Nf6 in the Scotch

That is complete BS. if he believed that he would have never played it. The KG was never busted, and even a good KG player knows how to handle the Fischer defence. Plus Fischer only took on 3. Nf3, never 3. Bc4, he played BOTH after he wrote the article,

Pfren please help prove this point.

That's funny you'd call the Parham unsound, because you posted about 5 boards where you hung material until you got one where you finally didn't lose material, even though you crippled your own position.

you must be forgeting that I am not infallable

If you claim the Parham is unsound, then why would you have hanged (hung) material against it? You have to give it credit, especially in faster games.

yeah in faster games, but at classical time controls with a consistent player as Black Black has at least a draw

Jetfighter, please, you have no clue what you are talking about. The Parham is incredibly underrated, by arrogant people by you who just overlook it. Since you're on chesscube now, save up 2500 cubits, and rent the Parham video by Andrew Martin. Numerous times he states how underrated it is, and how white had excellent position and tactical chances in the games he analyzed.

Every choice for your top 5 is Lame. Every "good" opening is bad. Everyone understands that except you 2.

Ok for those who want to DEBATE the Patzer Opening AKA the Parham

click here

Why would anyone play a fried liver, considering the win rate for white.

And it seems like those openings are just attacking, attacking, attacking.

Chess isn't just attacking.

And Waite-Harrison Opening is awful.

The win rate for white in a fried liver is 74%, I'd say that's pretty damn good...

Getting back to the Scotch if you want a more aggressive line you can try the Scotch Gambit, 4. Bc4. 

What about 5. d5?

Reading all of these posts make me wonder where I should be spending my time on strengthening my game. As a 1300-1400 rated player would I get most bang for buck: on opening, middlegame or endgame?  

Tactics first and foremost, then probably endgame or middlegame. Definitely not opening. In the opening, you're probably fine unless you outright drop a piece, in which case that would fall under the "tactics" category. Personally, I find that a good middlegame helps more at first, because endgame knowledge is useless if checkmate occurs before. On the other hand, a solid endgame means that immediately when you spot a winning endgame in sight, you can convert to an easy win by simplifying.

Backing up what Pfren is saying take a really good look at the position after your Qh5+. Beginners are very focused on if a king can castle when thats NOT the important issue, what is important is if the king is safe. (Gooten gives a nice break down I will share with you) pawns in front of king , Pieces attacking the king, pieces defending the king. 
White is behind in development, lacks central control etc. The black king is quite safe. Since nothing can attack him and white will have to make strange moves to complete his development. I didnt realize that a master of memedov's stature would attempt , even if in a blitz game.(Dos hermanas is an annual blitz event)

Studying the endgame can really be fun:

I get blown away 

Nightwolf, I see tactics pretty well for my level. Currently around 1700 on tactics trainer and normally spend 10-15 mins a day working on them. I still sometimes lose completely even endgames, does anyone know a good coach on this site?

I need to be reminded of this every once in a while. Black's dark squares are all okay, (a lone queen can't checkmate the king in that position) so open lines with ...d5!

This also removes the Qd5+ followed by Bh6+ giving black some trouble. 

Nice instructive post.

Here's an example where a king is in a safe location, on Kd1