@Post #17
The Ruy López is more complicated vs. Italian Game.
It might not seem like it is on the surface, but it actually is very complex.
Far more complex vs. Italian Game which is why they tell betters to start with Italian Game and eventually work their way up to Ruy Lopez.
But beginners are usually taught the Italian with c3 and the immediate d4 (stuff like the Greco Gambit, the Scotch Gambit or the line with exd4 e5). If you compare the Ruy Lopez and the Slow Italian with d3 (which is more critical) it's just as complicated as closed Ruy Lopez variations. I think even GM games proof that the Italian middlegames are sometimes harder to completely understand than the Ruy Lopez middlegames. Also, the Slow Italian is unmatched in the amount of move order tricks and traps, because the positions tend to look very similar when subtle differences matter.
Regarding your posts about the Arkhangelsk transposition: Why should Black after 8. ...Bb7 9. d3 respond with Bc5? I don't think moving the Bishop again makes a lot of sense. As Black I'd either go for 9. ...d5 or 9. ...d6. Now, you keep mentioning that the Anderssen Variation with the immediate 5. d3 is worse than the mainlines with 5. O-O. But I don't see how your high class waiting move 8. h3 Bb7 9. d3 d6 achieved anything better. You still can't push for d4; all the complications just to avoid the Marshall Gambit, so you might as well just go for d3 c3 to prepare d3-d4.
I don't use all the ideas in one game,it depends on what the opponent plays or even my mood.