Scotch Four Knights... What would you do after this move?

I've been enjoying the Scotch Four Knights as of late. I understand that it's not White's "best" try, but it's pretty straightforward and offers just enough of an advantage and is in no way "bad".

Anyway, I find that people not as familiar often go into the following sideline:

I don't really like going right into the end game, but maybe that's the best option? Anyway, how would you continue?

4...d6 is a terrible move. Do not trade pawns and queens. Take the space advantage and be happy. Black needs to play 4...exd4 or 4...Bb4

Keep in mind, the player with the space advantage wants to keep pieces on. The player with the space disadvantage wants to trade pieces to alleviate the cramp. Play 5.d5! There is no flashy mating attack in 25 moves or less, but you put the squeeze on black until he suffocates. It's like tying someone to a bunch of bricks and dropping them in the deep end of a pool rather than blowing their brains out with an AK47.

I'm more of a "keep the tension in the middle" kind of guy.  I'd probably play 5.Bb5.  It develops a new piece, pins a N, and prepares castling.

Great commentary. I've heard keeping the tension is a good theory (in general) where possible, but I do see the value in pushing d5

I get the impression that this would lead to more of a closed game though, and suspect Black would attempt to eventually push for a King side attack in the future since the Queen side is now locked up.

Looks like you have a variety of pleasant ways to continue then.  I think it's a little early in the game to proclaim any one move as best; depends on your playing style and how you wish to proceed.  I checked a few databases and almost any reasonable move has a winning %.  

I suppose by a computer analysis that may be true. It kind of reminds me of the exchange philador when the Queens come off the board and you slowly try to chip away.

I personally find it hard to come up with a concrete plan in these situations.

4...d6 is surely enough NOT a "terible move". A tad passive maybe, but quite OK. White's best is likely transposing to a Ruy Lopez Steinitz by 5.Bb5.

5.d5 is a sign of positional blindness. Closing the center is certainly NOT the way to fight that particular solid position. Black will of course play Ne7, and find a way to create play- usually involving the ...f5 push. No GM practice in that line, excluding blitz games and a few correspondence ones- for a good reason.

5.dxe5 Nxe5! is not much, either.

If you don't want to commit your bishop yet, you can play a semi-useful move which keeps the central tension. Say something offbeat like the following. Please note that white closed the center AFTER the e7 square was occupied by a piece! This makes quite some difference, since the knight has to retreat to b8, and Black's play is slowed down. Still, I think Black was just fine after the opening, and lost the game later.

Notice that a talented young player from my country (Theodorou, 15 y.o., already has the required norms for IM title) plays like that as Black many times, and has good results against strong opposition.

Whites advantage after 5.dxe5 Nxe5! 6.Nxe5 dxe5 7.Qxd8+ Kxd8 8.Bg5 c6 is basically fictitious. This resembles the currently popular "Modern Philidor" (1.e4 d6 2.d4 Nf6 3.Nc3 e5 4.dxe5 dxe5 5.Qxd8+ Kxd8 etc) but with a pair of knights being traded, which is certainly beneficial for Black.

Ha! 

For what it's worth I did play dxe in one game (believe I lost it eventually). 

IM Pfren's suggestion is also intersting... a waiting move of sorts.

We won't argue of course that Black's main try is 4...exd4 5.Nxd4 Bb4, although he must have something handy for 5.Nd5 as well. He might even have a serious look at 4.a3!? which is a tricky waiting move, as well as Giri's "rapid pet" 4.h3!? which looks harmless, but his 2.5 out of three against Caruana, Adams and Kramnik suggests that it's not that harmless, after all.

Interesting parry-thrust-and-counter-thrust!

FWIW after 16 minutes Stockfish-6 has 5. dxe5 battling out with 5. d5.

Whaaat?

Are you saying that a move that comes quite natural and it's not 100% certified by theory doesn't lead to immediate disaster for black?

Here it seems like black can even decide how to play his open games, instead of having to memorize a bunch of moves.

We should definitely report this back in the other thread.

@ Plutonia: Yes... that illiterate youngster does not play the Sicilian. He's just very lucky, and got his IM title and his 2440 FIDE rating by accident... :P

5. a3???

Yes, I think I have seen a lot of people running an engine at a single thread to evaluate a position after move (cough... cough...) four. The problem is that the output isn't always funny.

5.Bb5 is probably best, back to Ruy Lopez.

Yes, I think I have seen a lot of people running an engine at a single thread to evaluate a position after move (cough... cough...) four. The problem is that the output isn't always funny.

pfren: Yeah, I don't like to kill my bandwidth by running multiple threads for a chess engine -- I'm also programming and browsing. I just wanted a taste of what an engine would say.

Do you know how threads work? Do you understand the acronym "FWIW"?

I've left the engine running another couple hours and 5.d5 and 5.dxe5 are still at the top. Currently 5.d5 is ahead 30 centipawns. FWIW.

I recognize engine limitations in the opening. Still at this point I doubt 5.d5 is as bad a move as your claim of "positional blindness." I imagine it's playable and some hot new talent may find possibilities there, like your mention of Giri's 4.h3.

Chess theory is not over. You're the old guard and you will tell us how it was done in your day like it's an eternal truth. But it ain't necessarily so.

Cough, cough.

If the black knight on c6 was on d7 than you would be playing the Philidor!!

Everyone loves the Philidor!

"Pawns are the Soul of Chess"

Blocking the center just isnt going to be intuitive to most masters...its not considered the right apporahc to such positions...

The history of chess is largely the history of overthrowing the previous intuitions of masters. Which doesn't mean anything goes, but exceptions are found and new possibilities discovered.

I learned chess from Fred Reinfeld, who offered a classical Steinitz-Tartakower kind of chess that works pretty darn well for novices. I fainted dead away when I started playing in tournaments and discovered people breaking the Reinfeld rules right, left and center with impunity.

Since then I don't take anyone's intuitions that seriously. Stuff works until it doesn't, then people find new stuff which works until it doesn't.

I'm old enough to remember when the Berlin Defense of the Ruy was considered too passive and GMs wouldn't play it.