Classical Ruy Lopez fork trick- Refuted?

Lol white is much better if not winning. Seriously, 2 bishops, and absolute dominance in the centre, what more could you ask for from an opening!

Hmm, really?  White doesn't have too much more "dominance" in the center than he gets in some openings, and his King can't castle and will find it hard to do so artifically.  He does have the bishop pair in an open position, but woulnd't his King quickly become vulnerable? 

I think realitymate has proven how fast white can castle artificially using the tempo gained from d4

I will gladly play a thematic unrated game if you want!

The position after 3... Bc5 is well known theory and white doesn't usually play 4. Nxe5 but I've never really thought about why this is. Perhaps 4... Qg5!? causes white problems.

After 6 d4 black's best ( imo ) is either 6... Nc6 right away or first 6... Qf6+ 7 Kg1 Nc6 and white may still be slightly better but I dont think white is winning

I believe that the name of the thread is a bit misleading.

Classical Ruy Lopez fork trick IMO would be:

I would name the thread - " refuted fork trick in Ruy Lopez, classical defence".

And moreover, I don't think that "fork trick" deserves much attention here, as it only a distant 6th choice after black play Bc5 - chessgames.com opening explorer:

4. O-O	355	38.6% 36.1% 25.4%
4. c3	345	45.5% 29.3% 25.2%
4. Nc3	23	39.1% 17.4 43.5%
4. d3	11	54.5% 18.2% 27.3%
4. Bxc6	8	37.5% 25% 37.5%
4. Nxe5	3	33.3% 33.3% 33.3%