Answers.Body: <p>The Spanish (Ruy Lopez) is OBJECTIVELY better which means if you play most of your games against GMs and 3000+ rated engines it should be your main choice as a 1.e4 player.</p>
  <p>However, for most most normal people the Italian is going to give better results.</p>
  <p>I wouldn't recommend the main lines Ruys for anyone unless they have aspirations of reaching IM level or higher. And realistically if you're over 12 and asking this question thinking you can become an IM your aspirations are probably unrealistic. There is a ton of theory in the Ruy and the positional play can be extremely subtle. Most people would be better off spending their time studying tactics.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-08-16T09:34:19.317Z
Answers.Text: It's only objectively better until someone finds a move that changes everything
Answers.UserDisplayName: David
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-08-21T06:02:23.710Z
Answers.Text: @David- "Objectively" better means we know its a better move based on centuries of human analysis by the top human minds, countless games and engine analysis. The Italian is virtually analyzed out to a draw at best. No single move is ever going to change that.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Savage47
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-08-21T09:58:02.900Z
Answers.Text: It's a bit too ambitious to say that the Italian has been analyzed to be a draw at best when there are hundreds of games played by 2700+ players where White wins. According the the ChessTempo database, there are 677 games where a 2700+ player has gone for the Italian against another 2700+ player winning 25.8% of the time while only losing 21.9% of those games. These numbers include the Evans Gambit And yes, single moves can change the reputation of entire openings
Answers.UserDisplayName: David
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-06-02T06:13:50.207Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2020-08-16T09:17:38.183Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2020-08-16T09:17:38.183Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Savage47
Answers.Body: <p>Let us start with the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giuoco_Piano" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><em>Italian game</em></a>.</p>
  <p>Although it was long long ago since I was playing this opening, there are good reasons why it is not played anymore. The main reason it is not popular any more is the failure of the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giuoco_Piano#7.Nc3_(including_Greco_Variation_and_M%C3%B8ller_Attack)" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><em>Moeller attack</em></a>:</p>
  <pre><code>[fen &quot;&quot;]
  
  1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4. c3 Nf6 5.d4 exd4 6.cxd4 Bb4 7.Nc3 Nxe4 8.O-O Bxc3 9.d5 Bf6 10.Re1 Ne7 11.Rxe4 d6 12.Bg5 Bxg5 13.Nxg5 h6 ( 13...O-O 14.Nxh7!= ) 14.Qe2 hxg5 15.Re1 Be6 16.dxe6 f6 17.Re3 c6
  </code></pre>
  <p>In the old days people played the <em>Moeller attack</em> and in the beginning things were good for White --- sacrifice a pawn and get strong initiative --- but Black found a way to defend the attack --- see the lines above --- and the main line was destroyed. White tried with quiet <code>d3</code> and to prepare <code>d4</code> as in the <em>Spanish game ( <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruy_Lopez" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Ruy Lopez</a> )</em> but had no success.</p>
  <p>People tried with the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotch_Game#Scotch_Gambit" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><em>Scotch Gambit</em></a> --- mainly the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_Knights_Defense,_Max_Lange_Attack" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><em>Max Lange Attack</em></a> --- but Black did not need much time to find antidote-that line failed White too so it was abandoned.</p>
  <p>Tthe same happened with the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_Knights_Defense#Traxler_Counterattack:_4...Bc5" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><em>Traxler attack</em></a> and it was abandoned too.</p>
  <p>The <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evans_Gambit" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><em>Evans Gambit</em></a> had the same faith-I think <em>Lasker</em> was the one who proved that Black can at certain point return the pawn and obtain better chances due to better pawn structure.</p>
  <p>Nowadays, people seek various ways to improve these old lines but nothing tangible was found-either Black can <strong>sidestep</strong> the improvements or they give equal play.</p>
  <p>Now the good stuff --- the <em>Ruy Lopez</em>! After the moves:</p>
  <pre><code>[fen &quot;&quot;]
  
  1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5
  </code></pre>
  <p>we reach the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_chess#tabia" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><em>tabia</em></a>. We notice that there is <strong>no symmetry</strong> as in the <em>Italian Game</em>. Moreover, an important thing with  the <em>Ruy Lopez</em> is that White exerts <strong>maximum</strong> possible pressure on the center. That is the reason why it is better than <em>Italian game</em>, where center control is divided <strong>equally</strong>.</p>
  <p>Because Black is under pressure he <strong>needs to make concessions</strong>, usually via <code>a6</code> and then <code>b5</code> to chase away the bishop-which leaves him with weak <code>c</code> pawn. <strong>Because of advantage in the center and healthier pawn structure White has a long initiative and Black needs to play carefully to free himself.</strong> This usually manifests in White having a king side attack, or slight but long lasting positional pressure.</p>
  <p>Furthermore, in the <em>Spanish game</em>, White <strong>can create center formation he likes</strong> thanks to his <strong>flexible</strong> <code>d4+e4</code> pawn phalanx, something he <strong>can not do</strong> in the <em>Italian game</em>. This means that White can play with <strong>fixed center ( pawn <code>e4</code> vs <code>e5</code> ) , semi open center ( pawn <code>e4</code> vs <code>d6</code> ) or closed one ( <code>e4+d5</code> pawns vs <code>d6+e5</code> )</strong> and that gives him opportunity to try various <strong>transpositional tricks</strong> to outsmart Black-something that <em>Italian game</em> can not give you since the center is <strong>fixed and symmetric.</strong></p>
  <p>To summarize:</p>
  <p>The <em>Ruy Lopez</em> gives you a slight advantage in the center, slight initiative, great flexibility in steering the game, healthier pawn structure and great transpositional resources to outsmart your opponent.</p>
  <p>If you wish to improve as a player you should play this opening for a while, so you can learn how to play with different center formations. It is good for practising how to &quot;cash in&quot; the king side attack.</p>
  <blockquote>
  <p>Futhermore, in the Spanish does black have sharper continuations that he can throw against white?</p>
  </blockquote>
  <p>Yes he does --- the variation you seek is the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruy_Lopez#Marshall_Attack" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><em>Marshall attack</em></a>. It is very dangerous, and, as it is based on positional grounds, i doubt that a refutation of this gambit can be found. I think the current theoretical standing is <em>unclear</em>. Be warned, you must know theory very well to play against this line.</p>
  <p>If you have further questions leave a comment and I will respond.</p>
  <p>Sorry for incoherent answer, I wrote thoughts as they came to me. I could write a small book on this topic-there is so much to say about this-so if you need further information feel free to ask.</p>
  <p><strong>EDITED ON OPs REQUEST:</strong></p>
  <blockquote>
  <p>I am trying to understand if it is a lot better or only slightly better.</p>
  </blockquote>
  <p>It is <strong>way better</strong> than <em>Italian game.</em></p>
  <p>Black defends <strong>statically</strong> in <em>Ruy Lopez</em>, there are <strong>no counter-attacks</strong> ( except the <em>Marshall attack</em> of course ) so he needs to suffer a little in order to get counter-play.</p>
  <p>Since you have an <strong>ideal center</strong> ---<code>d4+e4</code> pawn formation --- you have a slight space advantage. You also decide what type of game shall be played --- open or closed --- depending on your decision to close or open the center.</p>
  <p>You get a king-side attack, and Black <strong>needs to defend himself</strong> --- his counter-play on the queen-side is not sufficient. Be warned --- the <em>Ruy Lopez</em> is <strong>highly complicated</strong> to play for both sides but that is the reason people play it with both colors --- because <strong>both sides must play accurately.</strong></p>
  <p>The reason I would not recommend it for Black is that Black lacks active counter-play, so he needs to defend for a long time, before he generates chances, and that is just too much for me.</p>
  <p>Generally speaking, White has easier play in the <em>Ruy Lopez</em>. He &quot;calls all the shots&quot; most of the time, and Black needs to <strong>repel White's threats first</strong>, and only then try to generate counter-play.</p>
  <p>This is one of the main reasons why Black often answers to <code>1.e4</code> with the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sicilian_Defence" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><em>Sicilian</em></a> or the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Defence" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><em>French defense</em></a>.</p>
  <p>This was my opinion, supported by my current knowledge and experience in the <em>Ruy Lopez</em> and <em>Italian game</em>.</p>
  <p>I must say that I have stopped playing <code>1.e4</code> long ago and that many things might have changed today but to test my claims it would be best to obtain good repertoire books on <em>Ruy Lopez</em> ( although I <strong>strongly</strong> believe that conclusions from those book will <strong>mainly support</strong> my conclusions ).</p>
  <p>Hopefully this answer sheds some light.</p>
  <p>Best regards.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2017-02-01T19:21:24.617Z
Answers.Text: Saying that "the Traxler was refuted and abandoned" as a criticism of the Italian seems odd. It's rare at the GM level, but that's because black seldom enters it, since it's tough to get compensation for the pawn if white plays 5. Bxf7+. White has had good practical results with it, and computers give white a solid advantage in the main line.
Answers.UserDisplayName: ckersch
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2014-01-27T21:07:25.430Z
Answers.Text: Great answer. What I mean by "I would like to ask, if the Spanish it that much better than Italian that its worth changing?", is that, I know that Spanish is better than Italian, but I am trying to understand if it is a lot better or only slightly better. If you don't mind can you suggest a edit and rephrase.
Answers.UserDisplayName: dreamcrash
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2014-01-27T21:10:39.083Z
Answers.Text: @dreamcrash: Ofcourse I will edit my answer to reflect your comment. Give me a moment. Best regards.
Answers.UserDisplayName: AlwaysLearningNewStuff
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2014-01-27T21:12:40.763Z
Answers.Text: I was referring if you could correct my english (of my question), instead.
Answers.UserDisplayName: dreamcrash
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2014-01-27T21:16:44.297Z
Answers.Text: Two side notes, and correct me if I am wrong. "Same happened with Traxler attack and it was abandoned too." Traxler is a black defense against Ng5 (http://www.thechesswebsite.com/traxler-counter-attack/). Second, I can avoid all the theory of the marshall by playing the anti-marshall right?
Answers.UserDisplayName: dreamcrash
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2014-01-27T21:29:42.820Z
Answers.Text: @dreamcrash: I have edited my answer, I will correct your post, although you can do so yourself. As for your comments about *Traxler* and *Anti-Marshal*-you are right for both ( you **can** sidestep *Marshall attack* and yes *Traxler* does include `Ng5` ). Best regards.
Answers.UserDisplayName: AlwaysLearningNewStuff
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2014-01-27T21:36:32.577Z
Answers.Text: Thanks again great answer, too bad I can only upvote once.
Answers.UserDisplayName: dreamcrash
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2014-01-27T21:38:20.550Z
Answers.Text: @dreamcrash: Thank you very much! If you need further help just leave a comment and I will try to help. *Do not quit if things get tough**-*Spanish game* is hard to master but it is **extremely rewarding.** Good luck and best regards!
Answers.UserDisplayName: AlwaysLearningNewStuff
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2014-02-06T17:43:22.207Z
Answers.Text: There are still strong GMs who play the Italian, and many GMs who have stopped playing 1.e4 due to the strength of the Berlin (3.Bb5 Nf6). I think saying the Ruy is "way better" than the Italian is far too strong.
Answers.UserDisplayName: RemcoGerlich
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2014-02-06T17:45:44.333Z
Answers.Text: Especially since the Italian is usually played with d3 and c3 nowadays, and that's a lot like the closed Ruy. Why don't you mention the main line?
Answers.UserDisplayName: RemcoGerlich
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2014-02-06T17:48:35.640Z
Answers.Text: @RemcoGerlich: Your comment is "on the spot" for the GM level, but overall *Ruy Lopez* is better than *Italian* **for the beginner**. It will generate better winning chances. I did mention `d3` line ( read carefully my post ) but did not cover it thoroughly with moves since its plans are similar to the *Ruy Lopez* so I tried to preserve space. Best regards.
Answers.UserDisplayName: AlwaysLearningNewStuff
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2014-01-27T21:01:15.327Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2021-10-20T09:22:21.057Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2021-10-20T09:22:21.057Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: AlwaysLearningNewStuff
Body: <p>I am currently playing the Italian opening with the white pieces.</p>
  <pre><code>[FEN &quot;&quot;]
  1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4
  </code></pre>
  <p>I have been training with a higher rating player, who suggests to switch to the Spanish opening(Ruy Lopez).</p>
  <pre><code>[FEN &quot;&quot;]
  1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5
  </code></pre>
  <p>I would like to ask, is the Spanish <strong>so much better</strong> than the Italian that it makes it worth changing? Furthermore, in the Spanish opening, does black have sharp variations that could be used against white?</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2020-06-02T09:47:34.247Z
Comments.Text: Unless you are rated about 2700, no. They're about the same
Comments.UserDisplayName: David
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2014-01-27T18:50:00.573Z
Comments.Text: My answer to the following question is slightly relevant: http://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/226/why-is-the-ruy-lopez-such-a-common-opening
Comments.UserDisplayName: Dag Oskar Madsen
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2014-01-27T20:39:51.767Z
Comments.Text: @DagOskarMadsen, yep, thanks for the suggestion.
Comments.UserDisplayName: dreamcrash
Tags: <opening><ruy-lopez><italian-game>
Title: Is the Spanish opening better than the Italian opening (for white)?
ThreadText: # Is the Spanish opening better than the Italian opening (for white)?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2014-01-27)
  
  I am currently playing the Italian opening with the white pieces.
  
  ```
  [FEN ""]
  1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4
  
  ```
  
  I have been training with a higher rating player, who suggests to switch to the Spanish opening(Ruy Lopez).
  
  ```
  [FEN ""]
  1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5
  
  ```
  
  I would like to ask, is the Spanish **so much better** than the Italian that it makes it worth changing? Furthermore, in the Spanish opening, does black have sharp variations that could be used against white?
  
  **Tags:** opening, ruy-lopez, italian-game
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_2**: My answer to the following question is slightly relevant: http://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/226/why-is-the-ruy-lopez-such-a-common-opening  
  > **username_0**: @username_2, yep, thanks for the suggestion.  
  > **username_1**: Unless you are rated about 2700, no. They're about the same  
  
  ---
  
  ## 2 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_4 on 2014-01-27. Score: 5 | Accepted answer
  
  Let us start with the [*Italian game*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giuoco_Piano).
  
  Although it was long long ago since I was playing this opening, there are good reasons why it is not played anymore. The main reason it is not popular any more is the failure of the [*Moeller attack*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giuoco_Piano#7.Nc3_(including_Greco_Variation_and_M%C3%B8ller_Attack)):
  
  ```
  [fen ""]
  
  1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4. c3 Nf6 5.d4 exd4 6.cxd4 Bb4 7.Nc3 Nxe4 8.O-O Bxc3 9.d5 Bf6 10.Re1 Ne7 11.Rxe4 d6 12.Bg5 Bxg5 13.Nxg5 h6 ( 13...O-O 14.Nxh7!= ) 14.Qe2 hxg5 15.Re1 Be6 16.dxe6 f6 17.Re3 c6
  
  ```
  
  In the old days people played the *Moeller attack* and in the beginning things were good for White --- sacrifice a pawn and get strong initiative --- but Black found a way to defend the attack --- see the lines above --- and the main line was destroyed. White tried with quiet `d3` and to prepare `d4` as in the *Spanish game ( [Ruy Lopez](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruy_Lopez) )* but had no success.
  
  People tried with the [*Scotch Gambit*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotch_Game#Scotch_Gambit) --- mainly the [*Max Lange Attack*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_Knights_Defense,_Max_Lange_Attack) --- but Black did not need much time to find antidote-that line failed White too so it was abandoned.
  
  Tthe same happened with the [*Traxler attack*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_Knights_Defense#Traxler_Counterattack:_4...Bc5) and it was abandoned too.
  
  The [*Evans Gambit*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evans_Gambit) had the same faith-I think *Lasker* was the one who proved that Black can at certain point return the pawn and obtain better chances due to better pawn structure.
  
  Nowadays, people seek various ways to improve these old lines but nothing tangible was found-either Black can **sidestep** the improvements or they give equal play.
  
  Now the good stuff --- the *Ruy Lopez*! After the moves:
  
  ```
  [fen ""]
  
  1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5
  
  ```
  
  we reach the [*tabia*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_chess#tabia). We notice that there is **no symmetry** as in the *Italian Game*. Moreover, an important thing with the *Ruy Lopez* is that White exerts **maximum** possible pressure on the center. That is the reason why it is better than *Italian game*, where center control is divided **equally**.
  
  Because Black is under pressure he **needs to make concessions**, usually via `a6` and then `b5` to chase away the bishop-which leaves him with weak `c` pawn. **Because of advantage in the center and healthier pawn structure White has a long initiative and Black needs to play carefully to free himself.** This usually manifests in White having a king side attack, or slight but long lasting positional pressure.
  
  Furthermore, in the *Spanish game*, White **can create center formation he likes** thanks to his **flexible** `d4+e4` pawn phalanx, something he **can not do** in the *Italian game*. This means that White can play with **fixed center ( pawn `e4` vs `e5` ) , semi open center ( pawn `e4` vs `d6` ) or closed one ( `e4+d5` pawns vs `d6+e5` )** and that gives him opportunity to try various **transpositional tricks** to outsmart Black-something that *Italian game* can not give you since the center is **fixed and symmetric.**
  
  To summarize:
  
  The *Ruy Lopez* gives you a slight advantage in the center, slight initiative, great flexibility in steering the game, healthier pawn structure and great transpositional resources to outsmart your opponent.
  
  If you wish to improve as a player you should play this opening for a while, so you can learn how to play with different center formations. It is good for practising how to "cash in" the king side attack.
  
  > Futhermore, in the Spanish does black have sharper continuations that he can throw against white?
  
  Yes he does --- the variation you seek is the [*Marshall attack*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruy_Lopez#Marshall_Attack). It is very dangerous, and, as it is based on positional grounds, i doubt that a refutation of this gambit can be found. I think the current theoretical standing is *unclear*. Be warned, you must know theory very well to play against this line.
  
  If you have further questions leave a comment and I will respond.
  
  Sorry for incoherent answer, I wrote thoughts as they came to me. I could write a small book on this topic-there is so much to say about this-so if you need further information feel free to ask.
  
  **EDITED ON OPs REQUEST:**
  
  > I am trying to understand if it is a lot better or only slightly better.
  
  It is **way better** than *Italian game.*
  
  Black defends **statically** in *Ruy Lopez*, there are **no counter-attacks** ( except the *Marshall attack* of course ) so he needs to suffer a little in order to get counter-play.
  
  Since you have an **ideal center** ---`d4+e4` pawn formation --- you have a slight space advantage. You also decide what type of game shall be played --- open or closed --- depending on your decision to close or open the center.
  
  You get a king-side attack, and Black **needs to defend himself** --- his counter-play on the queen-side is not sufficient. Be warned --- the *Ruy Lopez* is **highly complicated** to play for both sides but that is the reason people play it with both colors --- because **both sides must play accurately.**
  
  The reason I would not recommend it for Black is that Black lacks active counter-play, so he needs to defend for a long time, before he generates chances, and that is just too much for me.
  
  Generally speaking, White has easier play in the *Ruy Lopez*. He "calls all the shots" most of the time, and Black needs to **repel White's threats first**, and only then try to generate counter-play.
  
  This is one of the main reasons why Black often answers to `1.e4` with the [*Sicilian*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sicilian_Defence) or the [*French defense*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Defence).
  
  This was my opinion, supported by my current knowledge and experience in the *Ruy Lopez* and *Italian game*.
  
  I must say that I have stopped playing `1.e4` long ago and that many things might have changed today but to test my claims it would be best to obtain good repertoire books on *Ruy Lopez* ( although I **strongly** believe that conclusions from those book will **mainly support** my conclusions ).
  
  Hopefully this answer sheds some light.
  
  Best regards.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_0**: Great answer. What I mean by "I would like to ask, if the Spanish it that much better than Italian that its worth changing?", is that, I know that Spanish is better than Italian, but I am trying to understand if it is a lot better or only slightly better. If you don't mind can you suggest a edit and rephrase.  
  > **username_4**: @username_0: Ofcourse I will edit my answer to reflect your comment. Give me a moment. Best regards.  
  > **username_0**: I was referring if you could correct my english (of my question), instead.  
  > **username_0**: Two side notes, and correct me if I am wrong. "Same happened with Traxler attack and it was abandoned too." Traxler is a black defense against Ng5 (http://www.thechesswebsite.com/traxler-counter-attack/). Second, I can avoid all the theory of the marshall by playing the anti-marshall right?  
  > **username_4**: @username_0: I have edited my answer, I will correct your post, although you can do so yourself. As for your comments about *Traxler* and *Anti-Marshal*-you are right for both ( you **can** sidestep *Marshall attack* and yes *Traxler* does include `Ng5` ). Best regards.  
  > **username_0**: Thanks again great answer, too bad I can only upvote once.  
  > **username_4**: @username_0: Thank you very much! If you need further help just leave a comment and I will try to help. *Do not quit if things get tough**-*Spanish game* is hard to master but it is **extremely rewarding.** Good luck and best regards!  
  > **username_6**: There are still strong GMs who play the Italian, and many GMs who have stopped playing 1.e4 due to the strength of the Berlin (3.Bb5 Nf6). I think saying the Ruy is "way better" than the Italian is far too strong.  
  > **username_6**: Especially since the Italian is usually played with d3 and c3 nowadays, and that's a lot like the closed Ruy. Why don't you mention the main line?  
  > **username_4**: @username_6: Your comment is "on the spot" for the GM level, but overall *Ruy Lopez* is better than *Italian* **for the beginner**. It will generate better winning chances. I did mention `d3` line ( read carefully my post ) but did not cover it thoroughly with moves since its plans are similar to the *Ruy Lopez* so I tried to preserve space. Best regards.  
  > **username_5**: Saying that "the Traxler was refuted and abandoned" as a criticism of the Italian seems odd. It's rare at the GM level, but that's because black seldom enters it, since it's tough to get compensation for the pawn if white plays 5. Bxf7+. White has had good practical results with it, and computers give white a solid advantage in the main line.  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_3 on 2020-06-02. Score: 1
  
  The Spanish (Ruy Lopez) is OBJECTIVELY better which means if you play most of your games against GMs and 3000+ rated engines it should be your main choice as a 1.e4 player.
  
  However, for most most normal people the Italian is going to give better results.
  
  I wouldn't recommend the main lines Ruys for anyone unless they have aspirations of reaching IM level or higher. And realistically if you're over 12 and asking this question thinking you can become an IM your aspirations are probably unrealistic. There is a ton of theory in the Ruy and the positional play can be extremely subtle. Most people would be better off spending their time studying tactics.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: It's only objectively better until someone finds a move that changes everything  
  > **username_3**: @username_1- "Objectively" better means we know its a better move based on centuries of human analysis by the top human minds, countless games and engine analysis. The Italian is virtually analyzed out to a draw at best. No single move is ever going to change that.  
  > **username_1**: It's a bit too ambitious to say that the Italian has been analyzed to be a draw at best when there are hundreds of games played by 2700+ players where White wins. According the the ChessTempo database, there are 677 games where a 2700+ player has gone for the Italian against another 2700+ player winning 25.8% of the time while only losing 21.9% of those games. These numbers include the Evans Gambit And yes, single moves can change the reputation of entire openings  
  
  ---
  
  