My engine suggests 1...Nxe5 2.d4 Bxd4 3. Qxd4 d6 4. f4 Ng6 as very solid and playable for black with a +-(.25) but any blind man clould see white has a clear edge and I wouldn't want to play that position with black....
The Neo-Arkhangelsk seems good but....
Sort:
7. ..Nxe5 8. d4 Bxd4 9. Qxd4 d6 is the book line when 10. f4 should be answered with 10. ..c5 and then 11. ..Neg4 (so h3 can always be answered by ..c4).
Wow, I was convinced that there was some clever reply that I couldn't see, but the obvious continuation is the book line eh?
I agree with zxb that the position seems very good for white. He snatches The Pair and has more space for seemingly nothing. The Noah's Ark threat is easily parried with c3 so that threat can't really be what makes the computer like it.
I really don't understand what constitutes black's little edge according to the computer. If one of you was playing black, what would your plan be?
Maybe white can get a small edge out of it, but I think his position seems much better than it actually is. Black has active play (eg. with Bb7 pressuring against the e4-pawn) that should not be underestimated. I don't see from where white's extra (dark-squared) bishop is going to make a big difference (well, maybe from b2, but it simply can't get there).
I see your point. The bishop will also be further inconvenienced by the c3 necessity. I'll wait until I see how white Lopez players respond to it before I pass judgement.
I recently saw some very interesting games in the Neo-Arkhangelsk, and was playing around on my pocket set to take a peek at some of what I can expect when I give it a whirl here, but I hit a wall. I can't figure out the right way forward after the following position. Everything I've come up with seems to lead to a position that is just great for white, but the defense wouldn't exist if that was really the case so I must be missing something. Help!