Sveshnikov siclillian and after Bb5 then g6 and after Bxc6 then bxc6. I know that this is not a solid position but I like to know that I have an agressive advance in the center with d5. I may try the modern scandinavian but for now I think I'll stick with my Sveshnikov Sicillian.

 If you have interest in learning the ideas, even if it is a sideline defense, come check out our group!  We are having great discussions there, I know we are in the opening of our first Vote Chess game and I have learned a lot already!  Our other SA, CornerPawn, has a lot of literature on this defense, and the discussions are great!

A new book on the Qd6 Scandinavian is announced for this month.

It's by Chess Stars, and the author is a good friend of mine- GM Vassilis Kotronias. It's his first book on Chess Stars.

http://www.chess-stars.com/Future_Plans.html

I'm surprised he did not publish the book on Quality Chess. Probably because it's more accessible than his previous books (which are really hard, even for advanced players).

 Thank you Pfren.  I will be sure to share this info in our group!

I do not understand. Cf6 and c6. Allowing the line with Cf3 and Ce5. If I want to win I will go with g6. If I want to draw simply I delay c6 and play Bg4 and Bxf3 by following with c6 later. Why does not the cyrus book cover this line refuting White's Ce5?

...c6 is the most economical way to put some control over the squares d5 and b5 (the latter is important in the Qd6 line), but that shouldn't discourage you playing whatever you think is good, even if noone else shares your opinion.

My reasoning is based on the question of delaying a little c6. In order to avoid the more problematic lines that derive from Ce5. It surprises me that no author, as far as I have researched, informs this simple idea, that it simply refutes the lines with Ce5. Obviously, Bg4 decreases the options that refer to Bf5. My basic idea is that black can play 5.g6, for a more vivid game or 5. bg4 for a drier game. C6 can come quietly after these bids without the black guy having serious problems ...

Personally, I think the Scandinavian is a decent opening, just not one that I'm really ever going to want to play, because it seems that in more than half of all Scandi lines Black is in deep trouble and even the good lines aren't any better than, say, the Black side of the Ruy.

Indeed, engines at d=20+ suggest that 3...Qd6 is somewhat better than 3...Qa5.

Qd8 the best. I left Qd6

Do u mean some authors write books about a variation thinking it is not playable?

LMAO I can easily imagine this possibility! Kotronias should rather call it Saving Scandinavian with Qd6 like Saving Private Ryan!

The best book on the 3...Qd6 Scandinavian...

"The Safest Scandinavian" by Vassilios Kotronias

Currently available from House of Staunton, and on eBay..

http://www.houseofstaunton.com/the-safest-scandinavian.html

 http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2380057.m570.l1313.TR0.TRC0.H0.Xthe+safest+scandinavian.TRS0&_nkw=the+safest+scandinavian&_sacat=267

Initially Kotronias tried to bust the Qd6 Scandi, but ended playing it himself as Black, and authoring a (very good) book about it.

So now that this book has been published, what is the best line against the 3...Qd6 scandinavian pfren?

Is it still that Caruana 13.c3 line?

How do you play against ...Qd6?

why has tiviakov shifted away from playing it in the recent past, is it too easy to prepare for ?

He did not like the 6.h3 variation, but he still played the Qd6 stuff occasionally. Tiviakov is not very active (if at all) the last 18 months, or so.