21 Apr 06
From Wikipedia. 'King's Gambit: This opening was the most popular opening in the 19th century. White offers a pawn to divert Black's e-pawn and build a full center with d2-d4. In order to hold the extra pawn, Black will have to spend time weakening his kingside with moves like g7-g5. It is now rarely seen at the master level, it being generally thought that Black can obtain a reasonable position either by giving back the gambitted pawn at a later time or holding on to it and consolidating defensively.'
'How can a move which contests a key central square, e5, be called positionally weak?'
Because a key defensive piece has been overextended.
21 Apr 06
Originally posted by caffienexI noticed that you didn't fault Wikipedia for recommending that Black counter the King's Gambit by weakening his own kingside! White's 'anti-positional' move was not so 'anti-positional' after all.
From Wikipedia. 'King's Gambit: This opening was the most popular opening in the 19th century. White offers a pawn to divert Black's e-pawn and build a full center with d2-d4. In order to hold the extra pawn, Black will have to spend time weakening his kingside with moves like g7-g5. It is now rarely seen at the master level, it being generally thought tha ...[text shortened]... e5, be called positionally weak?'
Because a key defensive piece has been overextended.
On move 2, White has no 'defensive' pieces, because he is not under attack! It is meaningless to speak of 'key defensive pieces' when all your opponent has done is move a single Knight or pawn. Oooooh, scary! Better run for cover! 🙄🙄🙄
21 Apr 06
Originally posted by caffienexYou're very rude
BiggDoggProblem: You're a newb if you don't understand the difference between tactics and strategy. But to give you a hand, here are two positionally weak moves for white in the opening:
2. f4: which opens the king-side prematurely, and
3. Bc4: allowing the check, displacing the king, and losing castling rights.
If even a good player did this to ...[text shortened]... aker: what is so strange with my success? I have been playing low rated players after all.
22 Apr 06
Originally posted by caffienexActually 3.Bc4 is not a bad move. 3...Qh4 is shown to be an inferior move for Black after 5.Nf3, adding control to d4, forcing the queen to move, gaining a tempo and developing the K-Kt.
BiggDoggProblem: You're a newb if you don't understand the difference between tactics and strategy. But to give you a hand, here are two positionally weak moves for white in the opening:
2. f4: which opens the king-side prematurely, and
3. Bc4: allowing the check, displacing the king, and losing castling rights.
If even a good player did this to ...[text shortened]... aker: what is so strange with my success? I have been playing low rated players after all.
Some seasoned KGers regard it as better than 3.Nf3 as it avoids some critical Black defences, such as the Kzerietsky.
