Scotch Gambit

I have been playing various gambits (kings, evans, danish) and I decided to pick up this sound gambit.

What are some of white's ideas and goals?

Maybe the immediate 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.c3 is a better idea if you want a gambit? Not sure about the name (Goring Gambit?). Is a very close relative of the danish.

ajedrecito:

Against 4...Bc5 if W play your suggested 5.c3 Nf6 6.cxd4 Bb4+ (isn't this an Italian game rather than a Giuoco Piano?) isn't W still in gambit area? For example he can play the classical 7.Nc3 with a Moller attack.

Finally: in the classical lines of the Max Lange (5.0-0 in this move order) i guess the drawish move you refer to is 5...Nxe4. I have seen a recent attempt to revive the line and get a complicated game. if you are interested i can search it and give you a link. The author of the article was a german GM (Bueker?).

I used to think that the c3 lines are not called giuoco piano (if it is the case, then the name is very inappropriate!) 

This is the article i was referring to. The aim of the variation is to get an unclear struggle against Nxe4 rather than the usual simplifications.

http://www.chesscafe.com/kaissiber/kaissiber53.htm

I am a bit confused by your statements about Bc5 in the max lange. Despite having studyed several annotated games in the variation i have never seen any early drawing line. Instead every single game was a bloody fight. Nigel short for example has recently won an attacking game against a french GM in this line. Some GM also believe that not only W has practical chances but also a real slight edge. And in general i have usually seen the max lange described in terms of "this would be great if not for those dammned Nxe4 lines". You are a stronger player and probably better informed, but are you sure that Bc5 max lange is so drawish? Can you provide some lines?  

http://www.chesscafe.com/text/kibitz74.pdf

http://www.chesscafe.com/text/kibitz75.pdf

http://chessteacherlessons.com/a-lazy-players-guide-to-the-scotch-gambit/

Be sure to search the forums right here and to use a search engine to look up answers to this and similar questions. You may find my links useful.

I should never have switched from Scotch to Martinis.
Humphrey Bogart

Read more:http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/keywords/scotch.html#ixzz1L0B7fevE

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.c3 is the Ponziani... works well in blitz but not in otb or correspondence

I know i meant lines in which W plays c3 after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5.

(by the way, i don't like the Ponziani but i think you are exagerating a bit: at our level it's definitely playable both OTB and in correspondence. Harldy W can be much worse than equal with precise play. And i fear that against players like me and you (we have nearly the same rating) almost everything is playable. We simply suck at chess )

I really hate the term "Scotch gambit" - I know its technically correct but it sounds like drinking a bottle of whisky before the game to let your opponent win.  Let the campaign to call it the Scottish Gambit commence!

That I do know.  It was actually played with colours reversed also.

You are right! =) I actually use it otb on occassion against people rated ~1500-1600 (Danish national rating (mine is 1706 - a parenthesis within a parenthesis; is that even legal?) ) with good results - mostly they do not know the basic moves. 

Scottish Gambit does sound better in Scottish ears-good move HERE_IS_PLENTY  !!