the scotch

Lol there are many defences to d4 it might not be as much as e4 but black can still have the same succes a.k.a the kid is to 1.d4 like the sicilian is to 1. e4 it justs murders it

 The sicilian scores better than any other response to 1e4 and the kid is not what scores best against 1d4, the nimzo-indian is , so it would be more accurate to say the nimzo is comparable to the sicilian.

I've murdered many sicilian players with a big kingside attack. it's dangerous for both sides but I think a bit more so black.

sry reb but i think i rather compare the kid to the sicilian

 You can compare any opening you wish but percentage wise the KID isnt even close to the sicilians but the nimzo indian scores only 1 % less than sicilians do.

the kid is an all around defence to almost anything other than 1 e4 so i think the kid is a pretty great opening

and I DONT CARE ABOUT PRECENTAGES

Reb, it's more about people choosing the most fighting opening. The Sicilian is the most direct way for black to announce a fight against 1.e4, no doubt. Against 1.d4, it's surely not the Nimzo. Being a 1.d4 player, I _know_ my opponent is in a fighting mood when they play the KID.

thank you ozzie

 Well, I am outnumbered !! It just seems to me that if one wants to find a defense to 1 d4 to compare to the sicilian against 1 e4 one would naturally select the defense to 1 d4 that is most successful as the sicilian is the most successful against 1 e4. Using this criteria then the nimzoindian is the most logical choice. OK, the sicilian IS a fighting defense and so is the kid, granted. However if you just want to choose a "fighting" defense against 1 d4 and success rate doesnt come in then why not benoni, grunfeld, dutch , benko gambit ??  ( and there must be more ? ) These are all fighting defenses, are they not ?  

One point that is missed in this Sicilian, Nimzo, KID debate is that the Sicilian is more multifaceted than either the Nimzo or KID.  Leaving aside percentages, (that's why people play the lottery right? they ignore the percentages.)most Nimzo and KID games run the same.  Once the basic pattern of either is set you have a good idea of what is going to happen.  In the Sicilian the pattern is set immediately 1. e4  c5, but what does that mean?  Neither player knows.  Will white gambit (d4), close up (Nc3), sidestep (c3 or 3. Bb5) go main line (Nf3 & d4)?  What will black do once white has decided?  Dragon, Najdorf, Kan, Classical, Kalishnikov, Schevenigen, etc.

Against 1. d4, the closest comparison to the Sicilian defense is the Indian Defense, 1... Nf6.  I think the development of chess ideas will hold this up.  Just as 1.... c5 is set in opposition to 1... e5 in its ideas, plans, and goals we find 1... Nf6 is set is oppositon to 1.... d5 the same way.  Although there are other openings for both (French, Caro, Dutch) the main opening groups are Double KP & Sicilian, Double QP and Indian.

we are not debating about the sicilian being best but we are debating about which ones better nimzo or kid

Well probably nimzo, and I much prefer the KID! The nimzo indian is a good opening though since it creates often a positional struggle with some chances for both sides but is more solid.

The sicilian a fighting opening? What exactly is fighting about putting 25 moves of theory on the board, then your opponent has a novelty, and you don't know how to deal with it?

Novelties around move 25 or later happen most often in the Sicilian. It's more like a worn-out boxing glove than a shiny gauntlet to me

the sicilian is a fighting opening in so many of its variation and to most peopl like gms and other players its is a shining guantlet to basicaly equal the position.

Anyone else who agrees

The arguement started as which is most like the Siciian, Nimzo or KID, now which is better although it did degenerate into such.  Neither is better than the other, but just as the Sicilian is perceived as a fighting opening so to the Indians.  What they offer is not a "basically equal" but rather dynamic equality where the differing Black and White advantages, disadvantages, strengths and weaknesses provide nearly equal chances to both sides although White always maintains a slight edge in results.

So what does any of this have to do with the Scotch which we started with?

For everyone out there who is saying that they prefer the Ruy to the Scotch because the Scotch doesn't give good advantages for white... How are you guys combating the Marshall and the Berlin?

Unless I'm mistaken (which is possible since I switched off of it for 3. Bc4 three to four years ago), in the Scotch, white maintains a very very small advantage in pretty much all lines; basically the kind of thing that's a better endgame which you nevertheless have no real chances of winning. But that's part of the reason that if I played an IM or higher OTB in tournament and got the chance, I'd probably trot out the Scotch.

Also, I'm surprised that nobody's mentioned the Scotch Gambit, 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 exd4 4. Bc4.

Black equalizes in many lines.

black is great game in scoth

In what lines does black equalize exactly? I don't see any database statistics showing any equalization in the lines people are discussing. What lines are so much better in the ruy lopez then the scotch? Some data would be nice to see.