In the Scotch, White quite often ends up with a small structural advantage as Black ends up with doubled pawns on c7 and c6 after a Knight exchange on c6 in the opening.
The Noteboom variation (1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 c6 4.Nf3 dxc4) and Benko Gambit main lines (fianchetto and King walk) as Black ;
Modern 2-knights Defence with both colours (4.d4 exd4 5.0-0 Nxe4 6.Re1 d5 etc... leads to an endgame where all three results have been seen at high level ; so it's "an edge for the better endgame player").
Be careful, these are specific variations (or sub-variations) which require the cooperation of your opponent. Of course, your opponent will only give you good endgame prospects if you also have to face a difficult middlegame on your way home. Look for openings played by the greatest defenders (Karpov comes to mind). This is a typical strategy for Black, not so much for White. As in the openings previously suggested from White's viewpoint, White more often concedes some activity to Black in the opening and early middlegame in exchange for a structural plus in the middlegame (Scotch 4...Nf6, Nimzo-Indian 4.Qc2, English, QGD,...) rather than in the endgame properly speaking.
With White, it seems much more effective to threaten to go to a good endgame in order to let your opponent stay in a slightly worse middlegame. This is the typical plan in the Catalan, where you don't see the endgame so often, as not too many pieces are traded. But the threat of the endgame prevents Black from exchanging out of middlegame trouble (space). I think that this concept holds in most positions where White plays for a space advantage (French Rubinstein, Exchange Alekhine,...) : you have to prevent exchanges somehow, and just withdrawing your pieces does not maintain your space advantage long enough (unless it is already of decisive magnitude).
Definitely not an easy battleplan, for either color... But maybe an instructive way of arranging your repertoire.
Modern 2-knights Defence with both colours (4.d4 exd4 5.0-0 Nxe4 6.Re1 d5 etc... leads to an endgame where all three results have been seen at high level ; so it's "an edge for the better endgame player").
Be careful, these are specific variations (or sub-variations) which require the cooperation of your opponent. Of course, your opponent will only give you good endgame prospects if you also have to face a difficult middlegame on your way home. Look for openings played by the greatest defenders (Karpov comes to mind). This is a typical strategy for Black, not so much for White. As in the openings previously suggested from White's viewpoint, White more often concedes some activity to Black in the opening and early middlegame in exchange for a structural plus in the middlegame (Scotch 4...Nf6, Nimzo-Indian 4.Qc2, English, QGD,...) rather than in the endgame properly speaking.
With White, it seems much more effective to threaten to go to a good endgame in order to let your opponent stay in a slightly worse middlegame. This is the typical plan in the Catalan, where you don't see the endgame so often, as not too many pieces are traded. But the threat of the endgame prevents Black from exchanging out of middlegame trouble (space). I think that this concept holds in most positions where White plays for a space advantage (French Rubinstein, Exchange Alekhine,...) : you have to prevent exchanges somehow, and just withdrawing your pieces does not maintain your space advantage long enough (unless it is already of decisive magnitude).
Definitely not an easy battleplan, for either color... But maybe an instructive way of arranging your repertoire.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.