Is 4…c6 “the Schiller-Pytel and 4…Nf6 “the Gubinsky-Melts ?

The 3…Qd6 Scandinavian ( to me) plays like a beefed up French Rubinstien or Karpov Caro-Kan. A lot of the positions reached in the 3…Qd6 Scandinavian are very similar to the French Rubinstien or Caro Kan but with black to move and the queen active at d6. (imo not as drawish as the French Rubinstien or Caro Kan)

I’m finding many of the same strategies of the French Rubinstien or Caro Kan can be used. After 14…gxf5 the position resembles an aggressive variation of the French Rubinstien where black plays for the win. Another thing I like about this opening is black often has control over the type of play. For example after 11…Bd6 I believe black could have castled kingside and the game would have been quite in nature. Or black could have castled queenside and the board would have caught fire. Just so happens Mr Schiller does neither which is one of the reasons I think this is a great game.

If there is no difference, I’ll start to refer to the opening as the “Schiller-Melts variation” I think its most fitting, you have played some outstanding games with it over the years. Hopefully it will catch on. Also, let me add I think you’re a darn good author as well. One of my first chess books was the Queens Gambit Declined “Orthodox variation” written by you way back in 1984. To me that is the standard by which all opening monologs are measured! Too many authors just print data base dumps. I want to know what an author thinks about an opening and I want to be given the best/most interesting lines to play. You have always done that in your works. Since then, I have in my collection your "The Standard Chess Openings" Cambridge Springs (both first and second edition) and some of your works on the Reti. All Good stuff, no fluff and to the point!