I had a rather easy win with the KG yesterday. First time I'd seen 4...Qf6, and it certainly doesn't look too nice. I don't know if I had any advantage before he started hanging pieces, but I was just trying desperately to keep his king in the centre
Combat Stories and King's Gambit
Sort:
The King's Gambit is fine in blitz games, but it's no better than a surprise weapon in serious tournaments.
Even in the hands of a strong player, there are just far too many ways to get an advantage against it, or at least equalize. I used to play the simple 2...Nf6, which snuffs out any possible White attack and leads to a slight edge for White.
However, I've recently learned that the simple 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 variation is considerably in Black's favor, too.
ever study against the Bishops Gambit, because that is a much more, um fun variation
LaserZorin wrote:
However, I've recently learned that the simple 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 variation is considerably in Black's favor, too.
Oh my...that's one of the best laughs I've had in a while!
AndyClifton wrote:
LaserZorin wrote:
However, I've recently learned that the simple 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 variation is considerably in Black's favor, too.
Oh my...that's one of the best laughs I've had in a while!
Oh, and why is that? You're a lowly USCF expert, like myself.
Based on the games of internationally titled players, even strong GMs, the 3..g5 variation is unquestionably in Black's favor.
LaserZorin wrote:
AndyClifton wrote:
LaserZorin wrote:
However, I've recently learned that the simple 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 variation is considerably in Black's favor, too.
Oh my...that's one of the best laughs I've had in a while!
Oh, and why is that? You're a lowly USCF expert, like myself.
Based on the games of internationally titled players, even strong GMs, the 3..g5 variation is unquestionably in Black's favor.
Perhaps...but calling that variation "simple" seems pretty darned simple itself (shoot, I'm still laughing about it!).
(Oh yeah, and my rating was quite a bit higher at one time.) 
AndyClifton wrote:
LaserZorin wrote:
AndyClifton wrote:
LaserZorin wrote:
However, I've recently learned that the simple 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 variation is considerably in Black's favor, too.
Oh my...that's one of the best laughs I've had in a while!
Oh, and why is that? You're a lowly USCF expert, like myself.
Based on the games of internationally titled players, even strong GMs, the 3..g5 variation is unquestionably in Black's favor.
Perhaps...but calling that variation "simple" seems pretty darned simple itself (shoot, I'm still laughing about it!).
(Oh yeah, and my rating was quite a bit higher at one time.)
Oh, but it IS very "simple"; after 4. Bc4 Bg7 (instead of the old and inaccurate 4...g5?!), the variations are very much in Black's favor, and don't require any spectacular or non-intuitive moves on their part.
Of all the variations I have studied, including some very basic ones, like the Exchange Caro-Kann, the King's Gambit Accepted line with 3...g5 was one of the absolute simplest.
Also, your rating might have been higher at one time, but judging by your games on this site, you're presently an absolute scrub.
I guess laughing on message boards is your replacement for winning games on the White side of the King's Gambit against decent opposition. :)
In coorespondance, I find 3...g5 great to play as black and to put pressure on white to justify his pawn deficit.
Otb though, I am not terribly confident in my memorization abilities. I could wade through some of the 3...g5 variations, but I could easily fall victim to quite a few nasty variations. I mean, some of the moves there don't always seem "natural". In this case, I trust the Modern as it gives me an equal game with active piece play. I can play on a level playing field as my opponent where our true abilities will shine. The theory hounds are really uncomfortable with the Modern.
LaserZorin wrote:
AndyClifton wrote:
LaserZorin wrote:
AndyClifton wrote:
LaserZorin wrote:
However, I've recently learned that the simple 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 g5 variation is considerably in Black's favor, too.
Oh my...that's one of the best laughs I've had in a while!
Oh, and why is that? You're a lowly USCF expert, like myself.
Based on the games of internationally titled players, even strong GMs, the 3..g5 variation is unquestionably in Black's favor.
Perhaps...but calling that variation "simple" seems pretty darned simple itself (shoot, I'm still laughing about it!).
(Oh yeah, and my rating was quite a bit higher at one time.)
Oh, but it IS very "simple"; after 4. Bc4 Bg7 (instead of the old and inaccurate 4...g5?!), the variations are very much in Black's favor, and don't require any spectacular or non-intuitive moves on their part.
Of all the variations I have studied, including some very basic ones, like the Exchange Caro-Kann, the King's Gambit Accepted line with 3...g5 was one of the absolute simplest.
Also, your rating might have been higher at one time, but judging by your games on this site, you're presently an absolute scrub.
I guess laughing on message boards is your replacement for winning games on the White side of the King's Gambit against decent opposition. :)
I'm no expert, but why is White playing 4.Bc4 unless he wants to play the Muzio? Usually, White plays 4.h4 and THAT is not very simple at all.
KefkaKGA wrote:
I'm no expert, but why is White playing 4.Bc4 unless he wants to play the Muzio? Usually, White plays 4.h4 and THAT is not very simple at all.
4. Bc4 has nothing to do with the Muzio. It's simply a very popular move (as popular as 4. h4) which many strong players have played on the White side of the King's Gambit, GM Nakamura included;
http://www.365chess.com/opening.php?m=7&n=2998&ms=e4.e5.f4.exf4.Nf3.g5&ns=3.5.91.261.752.2998
I also disagree about 4. h4 being any more complicated.
After the simple 4. h4 g4 5. Ne5 d6 6. Nxg4, either 6...Nf6 or 6...Be7 lead to good, slightly better play for Black in positions which I don't really consider "complicated";
pfren wrote:
LaserZorin wrote:
After the simple 4. h4 g4 5. Ne5 d6 6. Nxg4, either 6...Nf6 or 6...Be7 lead to good, slightly better play for Black in positions which I don't really consider "complicated";
Both are OK, but no more than equal (and rather easy to play as white, too). I like having better winning chances as Black.
The generic problem with the kings gambit is precisely that: White is not worse in any variation, but Black has too many ways to a comfortable game.
Indeed, very true. That's probably a major reason why I rarely even see the King's Gambit on my much weaker level. (2000-2199 Elo)
Still, wouldn't you say that there are variations where White is slightly worse? After all, in high-level GM play, it's rare that White isn't worse from the opening after playing the King's Gambit.
Then post a variation where white is worse. You will find that white always get equality. It's very hard to find a defence which doesn't equalize for black, but i am not aware of any serious claim of a black advantage. Oh and remember that there's also 3.Bc4 to consider, also leading to equal play as far as i know.
The King's Gambit, once a very popular opening, is a rarity in high level chess today. This is possibly due to several factors, one of which is that other openings offer more for white. But the gambit isn't dead and isn't totally unused. When the KG is used, The Bishop's Gambit seems to be the more popular variation today.
Here are some nice modern games, some of which are by well known players. The Short-Kasparov game, it should be noted, is a blitz game and the Nakamura-Royset pitted players with greatly disparate skills.
For what it's worth, I recently wrote a 3-part article on the history and use of the Muzio variation of the King's Gambit that may (or may not) appeal to those interested in such things.
bresando wrote:
Then post a variation where white is worse. You will find that white always get equality. It's very hard to find a defence which doesn't equalize for black, but i am not aware of any serious claim of a black advantage. Oh and remember that there's also 3.Bc4 to consider, also leading to equal play as far as i know.
Shouldn't White want more than just equality in a bunch of lines Black can choose? Anywho, I think Black is a bit better in that 3...g5 variation I quoted above. You can claim it's equal, but it's a small difference either way.
Anyways, I'm no titled player nor am I a huge expert on the KG.
My point is that I'm a lowly 2029-rated USCF expert, and have always had a very easy time handling the King's Gambit, with great positions out of the opening, and no losses against it in tournament play.
Not only that, but I had to invest way less time and study to do it.
When I'm Black, I'm far more scared of facing someone who knows what they're doing against my Petroff, or hell, even the Staunton Gambit after 1. d4 f5 2. e4 than I am the King's Gambit.
On the contrary, when I see the King's Gambit, I become very happy. Even the Vienna Game or Bishop's Opening is more uncomfortable for me.
By the way, if I were trying to prop up the King's Gambit, I wouldn't mention the Nakamura-Royset game.
One of the 10-15 strongest players in the world, the great GM Nakamura, is in serious danger, as White, of giving up a draw to someone barely stronger than I am. (2180 rating)
He should be wiping that guy off the board, not having to figure out tricks in a completely equal ending! If that's a good example of the King's Gambit in action on a high tournament level, then I rest my case.
"the great GM Nakamura, is in serious danger, as White, of giving up a draw to someone barely stronger than I am."
Nakamura won.
It was an interesting positional game won eventually on tactics.
batgirl wrote:
"the great GM Nakamura, is in serious danger, as White, of giving up a draw to someone barely stronger than I am."
Nakamura won.
Yeah, I acknowledged as much in the post that you quoted. Of course a 2750-rated, top 15 GM is probably not giving up a draw to a 2180-rated untitled player. Even if he plays 1. a4 followed by 2. h4 as his opening.
That's not the point. The problem is that after the opening, the position was completely equal, and in addition to that, a dead draw.
The fact that a 2750 super GM like Nakamura couldn't even get a small advantage out of the opening against a 2180 player is a far more negative statement about the King's Gambit's viability than anything.
Not to mention he allowed the weaker player to trade queens and get to a dead position.
"It was an interesting positional game won eventually on tactics."
No, it really wasn't an "interesting positional game" in any way, shape, or form. It was a dull, drawn position where Nakamura had to pull a rabbit out of a hat. Being a modest 570 points higher rated than his opponent, he did.
Doesn't say a lot for the opening that his foe obtained that position to begin with, though.
yes, a bad game.
3...g5 has theory running 20 moves deep in several lines. "I think black is slightly better" is not a concrete argument. That line has been considered equal at least in the last 10 years. of course being equal at best is not a great archievement and so the KG is unpopular. I'm not saying the KG is great, i' saying that your claim of a black advangare goes against well-estabilished theory and the fact that you're making it without knowing even the basic lines (everyone studying the KG for 10 minutes should know than h4 is the main line and Bc4 was considered somewhat dubious already during Chigorin's life...) makes the whole thing vaguely funny.
bresando wrote:
yes, a bad game.
3...g5 has theory running 20 moves deep in several lines. "I think black is slightly better" is not a concrete argument. That line has been considered equal at least in the last 10 years. of course being equal at best is not a great archievement and so the KG is unpopular. I'm not saying the KG is great, i' saying that your claim of a black advangare goes against well-estabilished theory and the fact that you're making it without knowing even the basic lines (everyone studying the KG for 10 minutes should know than h4 is the main line and Bc4 was considered somewhat dubious already during Chigorin's life...) makes the whole thing vaguely funny.
I'm going by tournament practice. I don't care about the history of the opening line, and you mentioning it is completely irrelevant. I have done well against both 4. Bc4 and your much-vaunted 4. h4 with the basic moves I quoted on the last page. With them, I have obtained positions that yes, I felt were slightly better for Black.
The fact that you consider them equal is not a huge difference, honestly.
I was playing against fellow 2000-2199 and weak 2200-2300 masters, not internationally titled masters, but the point remains.
Speaking of laughable, I would love to see these mythical "20 move deep variations" in the modern 3...g5 lines of the KG. I think you just made them up.
2...Qh4+!?(keene defence) is not an outrightly bad move. The idea is to play something like 3.g3 Qe7 where white has to adopt a rather unusual formation for the king gambit. Some authors have tryed to claim equality for black in this line, which is certainly playable, but i must say that by continuing quietly wth 4.d3 white usually gets a nice lead in development in an otherwise level position. So when you see 2...Qh4+ you shouldn't expect a quick win, but not an unpleasant game either. It's rather easy to play the position for white.
Thanks for pointing this out. I just read about 2...Qh4+ in the FCO, and yes, Black has a plan, to draw White's g-pawn forward with the paradoxical intention of taking on f4 only when that pawn is protected. Here is a sample continuation.