The Chess Exchange

The Chess Exchange - To Your Chess Success!

Skip to content

It is currently Sun Oct 22, 2017 5:37 pm 






This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 21 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Previous topic | Next topic 

  Print view

Author Message
User avatar  Offline
Pawn
 
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2003 12:22 am
Posts: 18
 Post subject: King's Gambit
PostPosted: Thu Oct 23, 2003 11:58 am 
I'm interested in playing the King's Gambit, but I know almost nothing about it other than the 2 moves it takes to reach it:

1.e4 e5
2.f4

And the fact that Bobby Fischer came up with a defense to it. Can anyone here help me out?


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
User avatar  Offline
Rook
 
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2003 10:33 am
Posts: 80
Location: Dublin
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 23, 2003 8:00 pm 
In 1960 or so, Fischer claimed that he had "busted" the King's Gambit. But his analysis was only seeking to refute the line:
1.e4 e5 2.f4 ef 3.Nf3
Later, he actually used the King's Gambit himself, but after 2 ... ef he played 3.Bc4.

It will be interesting to hear what the experts have to say. The rationale behind the gambit is easy to see. Most elementary textbooks say that the strongest central pawn formation White can hope for is two pawns abreast on d4 and e4. But after 1.e4 e5, White can't play 2.d4, since Black can just reply with 2 ... ed, destroying White's formation. So White distracts Blacks e5 pawn by offering a pawn. After 2.f4 ef, White can play 3.d4 without any immediate danger.

So, then, why is it that no books on the King's Gambit recommend this as White's third move? On the contrary, it seems to be frowned upon as a weak move. What's the rationale behind the gambit if 3.d4 is an unrealistic move?


Top
 Profile  
 
User avatar  Offline
Site Admin
 
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 12:42 am
Posts: 1430
Location: Utrecht, The Netherlands
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 23, 2003 9:54 pm 
fickle wrote:
It will be interesting to hear what the experts have to say. The rationale behind the gambit is easy to see. Most elementary textbooks say that the strongest central pawn formation White can hope for is two pawns abreast on d4 and e4. But after 1.e4 e5, White can't play 2.d4, since Black can just reply with 2 ... ed, destroying White's formation. So White distracts Blacks e5 pawn by offering a pawn. After 2.f4 ef, White can play 3.d4 without any immediate danger.

So, then, why is it that no books on the King's Gambit recommend this as White's third move? On the contrary, it seems to be frowned upon as a weak move. What's the rationale behind the gambit if 3.d4 is an unrealistic move?



The King's gambit has three main objectives:
- give away a pawn to overpower the center
- use the newly created open file for a rapid attack on f7
- develop better, because black loses about 2 to 3 tempi for taking the pawn

The main setback of the gambit is problems with king safety.

From that viewpoint you can easily see why the move 3. Nf3 is almost imperative as:
- it controls an extra center square
- it prepares to go to g5 for an f7 attack
- it minimizes king safety problems with black's Qh4+!

Especially the combo Qh4+ (making white lose a very precious tempo) and d5 against the ill defended d4 pawn (wreaking havock in white's center, say white's e5 followed by black playing c5) makes you think twice before you forget about Nf3 and play d4 immediately.


Top
 Profile  
 
User avatar  Offline
Rook
 
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2003 10:33 am
Posts: 80
Location: Dublin
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 24, 2003 7:15 am 
Jeroen wrote:
From that viewpoint you can easily see why the move 3. Nf3 is almost imperative

So you disagree with Fischer that 3. Nf3 is a losing move?


Top
 Profile  
 
User avatar  Offline
Site Admin
 
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 12:42 am
Posts: 1430
Location: Utrecht, The Netherlands
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 30, 2003 2:45 am 
fickle wrote:
Jeroen wrote:
From that viewpoint you can easily see why the move 3. Nf3 is almost imperative

So you disagree with Fischer that 3. Nf3 is a losing move?


Worse, I _agree_ that most gambits are refuted because there are but a few GM's playing them. Fedorov isn't doing that good with the KG as he wishes to.
But Fischer's bust appeared not to be a bust.

The bishop gambit he played after the Spasski defeat is old and venerable, and with Bc4 aims at the same targets as Nf3: hampering black center pawn development and aiming at f7. Qh4+ is less attractive because Kf1 is more sound than Ke2 or Kd2 after 2.d4 Qh4+

Gambiteers forfeiting on a gambit because they include possible losing moves should be picked out by the bouncer and are shown the cobble stones from up close..... :D :twisted:

All the best,


Top
 Profile  
 
User avatar  Offline
Rook
 
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2003 7:49 pm
Posts: 86
Location: Texas
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 01, 2003 8:28 pm 
Another radical idea from Stefan Bucker in the King's Gambit:

1.e4 e5 2.f4 Qf6!?

Ah, I love this oddball stuff :roll:


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
User avatar  Offline
King
 
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 3:12 pm
Posts: 150
 Post subject: kg move order
PostPosted: Sun Nov 02, 2003 7:00 am 
i generally get into a king's gambit when i decline from's gambit to the bird opening.
the move order is ..... 1.f4 1. ...e5 (with the idea 2. f:e5 2. ...d6!) and then <gasp!> 2.e4


Top
 Profile  
 
 
 Post subject: Kings Gambit
PostPosted: Mon Nov 17, 2003 5:08 am 
I have been pling the Kings Gambit, Bishops var fo years with good reuslts.

Its less complicated for white and less known for black.

To pay the KG you havew to know the Falkbeer.

Bill :idea:


Top
  
 
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 21, 2003 8:04 am 
see gallagher winning with the king's gambit, lasker's book on the rice gambit---also trends,estrin and glaskov-----fishers bust was a trifle premature-----oldrupe@hotmail.com i have most modern books on the gambit


Top
  
 
 Offline
Newbie
 
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2003 4:17 pm
Posts: 3
Location: POLAND
 Post subject: strongest reply for king's gambit
PostPosted: Fri Dec 05, 2003 5:28 pm 
1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5! 4. h4 g4 5. Ne5
Nf6 6. Bc4 d5
7. exd5 Bg7 8. d4 O-O 9. O-O Nh5 10. Nxg4 Qxh4 11. Nh2 Bf5 12.
Nc3 Nd7 13. Nb5 Rac8 14. Nxa7..... try to find strongest (by shredder 7.04:))) (that can be authority engin so do not quarrel)

this is the strongest reply that i have ever found


Top
 Profile  
 
 Offline
Newbie
 
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2003 7:57 pm
Posts: 4
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Dec 20, 2003 8:17 pm 
fickle wrote:
Most elementary textbooks say that the strongest central pawn formation White can hope for is two pawns abreast on d4 and e4. But after 1.e4 e5, White can't play 2.d4, since Black can just reply with 2 ... ed, destroying White's formation. So White distracts Blacks e5 pawn by offering a pawn. After 2.f4 ef, White can play 3.d4 without any immediate danger.

So, then, why is it that no books on the King's Gambit recommend this as White's third move? On the contrary, it seems to be frowned upon as a weak move. What's the rationale behind the gambit if 3.d4 is an unrealistic move?


The reason 3.d4 is not good is:

1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.d4? Qh5+ -+

In the lines with 3.Nf3, White gets to play d4 later


Top
 Profile  
 
 Offline
Newbie
 
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 5:41 pm
Posts: 4
 Post subject: Re: strongest reply for king's gambit
PostPosted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 5:08 am 
[quote="Biszlejmut"]1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5!

Actually, I favor 4. Bc4 with a great game. I have won every time I have played it OTB and correspondence.

e.g. 4. Bc4 g4 5. 0-0 gxf3 6. Qxf3 Qf6 7. e5 (my favorite) Qxe5 8. Bxf7+ Kxf7 9. d4 !xd4 10. Be3 Qf6 11. Bxf4 and white is just fine. (I typed that ll from memory and hope that I did it right.)


Top
 Profile  
 
User avatar  Offline
King
 
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 4:32 am
Posts: 182
Location: India
 Post subject: Re: strongest reply for king's gambit
PostPosted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:32 am 
Canib wrote:
Biszlejmut wrote:
1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5!

Actually, I favor 4. Bc4 with a great game. I have won every time I have played it OTB and correspondence.


e.g. 4. Bc4 g4 5. 0-0 gxf3 6. Qxf3 Qf6 7. e5 (my favorite) Qxe5 8. Bxf7+ Kxf7 9. d4 !xd4 10. Be3 Qf6 11. Bxf4 and white is just fine. (I typed that ll from memory and hope that I did it right.)


Your memory is perfectly all right, and quite outstanding too!

1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.Bc4 g4 5.0-0 gxf3 6.Qxf3 Qf6 7.e5 Qxe5 8.Bxf7+ Kxf7 9.d4 Qxd4+ 10.Be3 Qf6 11.Bxf4

I believe, if I am not wrong, that is the Muzio Gambit. The Muzio seems to work for you, but the case is contradictory with me. I have played the Muzio many times, but often I can not handle the unequaled wildness of the game, which eventually leads to a '0-1'. Later, I switched to Ghulam Kassim, which turned out to be worse, and then I changed my King's Gambit repertoire to Lolli Gambit:

1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 g5 4.Bc4 g4 5.Bxf7+ Kxf7 6.Ne5+ Ke8 7.Qxg4 Nf6 8.Qxf4 with enough compensation for the bishop.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Offline
Newbie
 
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 11:01 am
Posts: 2
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Apr 26, 2005 11:34 am 
Howdy,

since you're discussing the King's Gambit you might be interested in my new book about it: The Fascinating King's Gambit - A Repertoire for the 21st Century

It only looks at the Bishop's Gambit if the pawn is accepted, because 3.Nf3 g5! is indeed annoying :( while 3.Bc4 g5? is rather nice for white since h2-h4 is much stronger when g5-g4 doesn't threaten a knight on f3.

Sure, 3...Qh4+ is scary if you don't know how to play it, but once you've assimilated a few ideas - it's rather fun to be white! :wink:

For example, one such idea (found by Chigorin btw) is 4.Kf1 g5? 5.Nc3 (note that pawn-c7 is not defended) 5...c6 6.g3! fxg3 7.Kg2! and white gains momentum since Qh4 loses a lot of time after 7...gxh2? 8.Rxh2 Qf4 9.d4, so 7...Qh6 8.hxg3 is best and white is happy! :D

An even better example is when black tries to speed development with 5...Bg7 (instead of 5...c6 above) 6.d4 Ne7 (dealing with the threat Nc3-d5) 7.g3 fxg3 8.Kg2 and since f4 is covered this time, black's queen must retreat with white's forces in hot pursuit...

The other half of the book deals with black's different ways of declining the gambit (plus some transpositions to 3.Nf3 positions or attempts at transposing). Since, as mentioned earlier in this thread, you can't play the KG if you don't know what to do against the Falkbeer! :roll:

For more info on the book see my site: http://hem.passagen.se/tjmisha/countdown.html

/Thomas Johansson


Top
 Profile  
 
User avatar  Offline
Pawn
 
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 7:09 pm
Posts: 8
Location: Atlanta, GA
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 28, 2005 3:15 pm 
I don't get to encounter the King's Gambit very much, but I have sometimes taken the offered pawn and tried using the Fischer Defense with d6...with mixed results. :?

I have found it to be much more interesting game to actually decline the gambit and offer a counter-gambit of my own...either the Falkbeer or Nimzovitch counter-gambits! It seems to throw White for a loop every single time, and they have sometimes never recovered from the shock! :shock:

Regards,

Bill


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 21 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:

Who is online

In total there is 1 user online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 1 guest (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 193 on Thu Jun 28, 2007 1:40 pm

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest





cron

ChessCentral - The Leader in Cutting-Edge Chess * Buy Fritz 12 * Buy Rybka 4 * Buy Fritz Powerbook DVD


Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group

Style based on Andreas08 by Andreas Viklund and created by Elizabeth Shulman, Stop Animal Rights, Dog Training by corgipower