Originally posted by mateuloseIt is not unsound. It is loose. Anything can happen. That is why we like it.
If you want to improve your chess, do not play an opening that has been proven to be unsound for the past 100 years, ie: the King's Gambit. I know you will flame me about this, but Paul, if you really wanna improve your game, you have to ...[text shortened]... acking variations, this is not an average player friendly opening.
[Event "Wch PCA"]
[Site "Blackpool ENG"]
[Date "1993.10.??"]
[Round "3"]
[White "Short, Nigel D"]
[Black "Kasparov, Gary"]
[TimeControl "-"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "C33"]
[WhiteELO "2655"]
[BlackELO "2805"]
[WhiteTitle "IGM"]
[BlackTitle "IGM"]
[WhiteCountry "ENG"]
[BlackCountry "RUS"]
1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Bc4 Qh4+ 4.Kf1 b5 5.Bxb5 Nf6 6.Nf3 Qh6 7.Nc3 g5 8.d4 Bb7 9.h4 Rg8 10.Kg1 gxh4 11.Rxh4 Qg6 12.Qe2 Nxe4
13.Rxf4 f5 14.Nh4 Qg3 15.Nxe4 1-0
Originally posted by mateuloseSurely playing an opening that lends itself to attacking play where quick piece development and tactical finesse are the order of the day can only help improve your play? That's true at my level.
If you want to improve your chess, do not play an opening that has been proven to be unsound for the past 100 years, ie: the King's Gambit. I know you will flame me about this, but Paul, if you really wanna improve your game, you have to let go of that opening. Very few GM's play it, and those who do, see complex sacking variations, this is not an average player friendly opening.
Jeremy Silman recommends playing gambit openings for developing players so that they can concentrate on rapid piece development and open, attacking games.
I'm always amazed at players rated below 1800 who have such an indepth knowledge of the latest GM favourite 'skunk variation of the patzer schwing opening' to move 15 but will later miss a ton of tactical opportunities and have no idea about correct endgame play.
Originally posted by paultopiaHere a few comments (on this message and a few later ones):
weird, I can't believe mephisto played that thing.
- the game with Gumbies was an unrated (setup) game, meant to try things out. It is not a demonstration of my belief that queens should be brought out prematurely (they shouldn't). But chess is a game and I like to experience all facets of it. It is also good training stuff for KG players.
- the Nordwalder is probably not 100% sound (I stated that in that game too), but it sure looks far worse than it is. Besides the rather obvious reasons for NOT playing it, there are some strategic reasons why it can be successful:
= it looks like a beginner move and tends to prompt KG players to even more unsound reactions (your point)
= there are lots of variations where black can bring the game into positional lines (not applied in that game, only commented on it), something that most gambit players hate. That's a second psychological advantage for black
= the idea of taking the f-pawn with the queen, trying to hold on the stronghold on e5 is interesting, even at the cost of a few tempi.
On the variations:
a) 3.Nf3 Qxf4 4.Nc3 Bb4 5.Bc4 Bxc3 6.0-0! (Soltis' recommendation) is good for white indeed. The main defender of the Nordwalder (Stefan Bücker) says that this line 'comes close to the refutation of the Nordwalder'. But it needs a long series of strong moves by white in a wild and sharp game to make it happen. Most players who are unfamiliar with this variation will not find them all. Btw. , after 6.0-0, black will give the knight back. He has no time to retreat it, the game looks very much like the Muzio,perhaps even more deadly.
b) probably slightly better than 3.Nf3 is 3.Nc3. It can easily transpose to the above line (the game posted by !~TONY~! is an example), but it has its own merits after 3.Nc3 Qxf4 d4. However, most KG players will hate this because it often leads to a more positional treatment .
c) Black doesn't have to play 4. ... Bb4 in the two-knights variation. He can play the safer 4. ... d6 instead, or even f6, or both (leaving the queen in a dangerous position, but there are ways out via Qg4).
d) the idea 3.d4 is interesting too. But stating that white simply takes back the pawn with 4.e5 is an over-simplification when black plays 4. ... Qb6. Probably, white's better move order is 3.d4 exd4 4.Nf3 to which black will reply most likely with Bb4+ (5.Kf2 d5!) leading to a sharp game, but with good chances for black too.
Just to say that these 'weird' openings are not all that simplistic. Serious games between two players, both much stronger than me, have been won by black.
If you want to try something out, just pm me.
Paultopia and I did an unrated setup with 2...Qf6 as a starting point. White wins but I'm still not sold on that particular defense of the opening because of its doubled pawns and crazy structure.Game 692665
I think some of us enjoy the blood rush that comes to our head when we play the KG. It's just the feeling of living on the "edge of the cliff" where you are likely to either get creamed or be the one who creams someone else. I never smoked in my life, but I imagine that the feeling for me is rather like a nicotine rush for someone who does. Yes, I admit, it's (at least for me) an addiction. Bit it's an addiction that I enjoy, and I won't ever have to worry about cancer from it, so I guess you could say that KG is my one vice in life.
but then, on the other hand, for me chess in and of itself is an addiction.
And did I mis read this thread, or did I not yet hear anyone mention that Fischer wrote a "Bust To The King's Gambit"? If memory serves me correctly, I believe the year was about 1960, and Fischer's defeat against Spassky at Mar del Plata is what brought it all on. Correct me if my facts are not straight here, but I am trying real hard to remember)
Anyway, his analysis was published in the American Chess Quarterly, and he reccomended 3...d6 as a "high class waiting move".
Anyway, be that as it may, many of us still love "swashbuckling" style chess, and we rather dearly love the KG, as opposed to the more quiet chess of, well, let's say for example's sake, the Giucco Piano? That one can put me to sleep!
But, the old saying goes, to each man his own. It's whatever floats your boat. whatever trips your trigger. Whatever crumbles your cookie, on and on, ad infinutum.
Originally posted by KWCoronaAs white I would NEVER feel comfortable in that position, even though you won. ONE little mistake, and white is pretty much toast, not a good position to be in seeing that white is supposed to maintain a small advantage, not live on edge. Fortunenately for you, black made more, and bigger, mistakes.
Paultopia and I did an unrated setup with 2...Qf6 as a starting point. White wins but I'm still not sold on that particular defense of the opening because of its doubled pawns and crazy structure.Game 692665
I've always said it takes more then one mistake to lose a game, and paul flamed me for this, but now I remember he plays the KG's, and doing a mistake on the King's Gambit, no matter how small or unaparent at first, is the difference beteewn a win or being checkmated!
Originally posted by mateuloseFor either side. :-)
doing a mistake on the King's Gambit, no matter how small or unaparent at first, is the difference beteewn a win or being checkmated!
plug this into your pgn viewer -- it's me as white versus a player roughly 140 points above me, in a slow (60min, 30 second increment) game on FICS.
1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 d6 4. d4 Qe7 5. Bd3 g5 6. O-O h5 7. Re1 g4 8. e5 Be6 9. d5 gxf3 10. dxe6 f2+ 11. Kxf2 Qh4+ 12. Kg1 f6 13. Bg6+ Ke7 14. exd6+ cxd6 15. Bf7 Nc6 16. Rf1 Bh6 17. Qe2 f3 18. Qxf3 Bxc1 19. Rxc1 Ne5 20. Qxb7+ Kf8 21. Qxa8+ Kg7 {Black resigns} 1-0
I do so love arrogant Fischer defense players. They think they've got the KG refuted. I love it even more when they then load up a menacing mass of pawns on the kingside, completely neglecting their center or development.