The King's Gambit is a good opening.
People say its rarely played in high level tournaments, if you mean like GM tournaments or rating of 2000+ than ok i can understand why GM's dont play it. Its part of the fact that it is well known for GMs but also that many people dont adapt well to playing the Kings gambit, they dont like how its played or whatever. And even if a lot of people know about it, and counters... doesn't mean its gunna work all the time. I have been using the KG for a long time now and still am curently. I use it in my high level tournaments 1900+ and such... and i mostly win because of it. Yes there are books saying do this if white does that. But the moves go up to what, like move 12 or something. Than afterwards alot of people are clueless. Plus I don't do the moves from the book deliberatly to confuse the other player, the moves i do still benifit my position. Here is an example, face to face game, friendly the guy had a rating of 2195 or something close to that. I play as white. Time control of 1 hour and 30 minutes. (also please note i dont know the symbols in English, when i write my games i right them in Russian format so ill just spell out the names) The game starts: 1. E4, E5. 2. F4, ExF4. 3. Knight F3, Bishop E7. 4. H4, G5. 5. Hg, Bishop G5. 6. Knight G5, Queen G5. 7. Queen F3, D6. 8. D4, Bishop G4. 9. Queen F4, Queen A5+. 10. Knight C3, Bishop E6. 11. D5, Bishop D7. 12. Bishop E2, Knight A6. 13. 0-0, Queen B6+. 14. Bishop E3, Queen B2. 15. Queen F7+, King D8. 16. Bishop G5... and black resigns. I asked him why he played so poorly, but being a good sport i still said he was very good and such, just asked "Why did you play weak this match" he said "because i was suprised the way you played, I've seen other people do similair moves but what you were playing caught me off guard". We played one more time and i played as white again, and i played KG again just to see what he did differently. End result of the rematch was a draw. My point being, KG is a great opening, you can even use it in High level tournaments, or against high level players. Just as long as you know the KG throughly and the most important part of the KG is you add your own touch not go by book games. You have to change moves around, get comfortable. Just put your soul in it and you will see a significant change.
Thank you for taking the time to read and examine(if you did) the game. If you don't aprove or believe this than i dont know what else i could say to give proof.
Hope this helped, take care.
It's a decent opening. I like this line. 1.e4, e5, f4, exf4, Bc4!?
I like to play 2... Bc5. It's a good response and no one studies the Kings Gambit Declined anymore!
Actually, it's not a very good response at all. Black struggles to find equality in all Declined lines if white knows the theory well. Even the most recent attempts by Marin in How to Beat the Open Games have been effectively refuted by GM's Kosten and Renet. The irrational 3...g5 is blacks only hope.
To the OP: For amateur players who love to attack, you couldn't ask for a better opening. Very few people take the time to learn the proper defenses and fewer still have the technique to defend without knowing the theory.
I've had pretty good results with the KG as white - even online where people have databases on their side. It's certainly more fun than some openings.
Fischer never said that. He claimed that his defense 1.e4 e5, 2.f4 ef, 3.Nf3 d6 leads to a better game for black (which indeed would mean a 'refutation', in the language of theoreticians!) but he never proved that conclusively.
To the contrary, Bronstein claimed that the above Fischer defense leads to an excellent position for white.
I have to shut up from here, since I cannot compete with the two coryphea...
Anyway, Fischer's defense has many open questions, too. Here is one:
1.e4 e5, 2.f4 ef, 3.Nf3 d6, 4.d4 g5, 5.h4 g4, 6.Ng1.
How do you play with black? If white wins back the pawn (I don't see how to hinder that), black still remains with some weak squares on the kingside... (f5,g5, also the pawn f7). Well, also white has a weakened kingside, and has just made a 'stepback' in development...
Glaskov and Estrin claim, white has an excellent position.
Perhaps Black can try 6....f5 (I never saw an analysis on that).
Old thread, but what the hell, I'll give it a go....
Fischers Defense is sturdy but so few people understand what he was trying to achieve (avoid the Kiseritsky, reach a Hanstein position) and why that I'm happy to face it. Personally, I transpose into the Quaade lines and suddenly black is lost in unfamiliar woods. From there, I can steer the game into something Anderssen or Morphy would have played which is just the sort of position that most KG players strive to play and just the sort of position that black was desperate to avoid. Move order trickery is a KG players best friend.
Estrin's book is a classic work but the theory has advanced by leaps and bounds in recent years. Even the books by Gallagher and McDonald are out of date in many of the most critical lines.
Anyone who thinks they have an easy answer for the King's Gambit is in for a rude awakening. Like the Najdorf, the King's Gambit requires concrete knowledge of variations. Sometimes the most natural looking move in the world, one that seems perfectly logical, invites disaster. And all it takes is a single mistake. I recently played a game where black slammed out 12 moves of theory in seconds and then completely lost it a few moves later by making a positional mistake that any King's Gambit player can instantly recognize and pounce on:
I thought 2...Bc5 was reasonable, the "sensible" thing to do, like what a GM would play...
But seriously not that I don't believe you, since I've heard of 2...bc5 just never studied it, but if GM's play 3...d5 giving back the material, what's the point of accepting it in the first place? It just seems to allow white to have a stronger center and an open f file where black has the crummy pawn on f4. Or is 3...d5 even considered good anymore? Was 2...Bc5 like refuted a few years ago or something? And you're right, most people SUCK at playing against the thing. In all of these novice games out of the king's gambit the black player would never consider 3...g5. It's like 1 e4 e5 2 f4... free pawn! Nf3 I'll just develop! Nc6 d4 and the pawn is probably going, or else black enters into a bad ...g5 line and white has a BEAUTIFUL position. But eventually the struggles are much more balanced and interesting. And if they know 3...g5 but no other moves, their position usually falls in flames to an even bigger kingside attack because the black kind isn't even safe. Study is the key to fighting the king's gambit, for both black and white.
I think it's a little biased towards the white side. That same position is not always claimed horrible for black in other books I saw! Can white really get the pawn back? What's the analysis on that? If he can I guess it is good for white, but then how is it a gambit? Anyways why GM's don't use the KG that much is more of a combination of giving black too many chances and the theory. But if black didn't want a wild game, maybe it would be good then, though GM's are relatively really good at everything. Kasparov, a fighting player could probably do very well against it, and karpov is a tenacious defender. Yeah he lost to spassky, but wasn't he up material or something? It seems more like a blitz game and I think we could use more wins against him for it to be clear.
Leko's 6...f5 leads to interesting, unclear positions that are more or less equal without being drawish.
7.Nc3 fxe4 (7...Nf6 8.Bxf4 Nxe4 9.Qe2 Qe7 (9...d5) 10.O-O-O) 8.Bxf4 d5 9.Qd2 c6 10.O-O-O Bd6 11.Nge2 Ne7 12.g3 b5 13.Be5 Rf8 14.Qh6 Nf5 15.Qxh7
That said, I never play these lines. I transpose into Quaade/Rosentreeter territory with 5.Nc3.
I am currently forcing myself to play nothing but KG when I am white and generally welcome the chance to play against it as black. As for the so called fischer defense ( i like calling it that too!) i can't disprove it as a bust but i don't think it can be currently proved a bust either.
@birdbrain..the rook sac (losing the trade, if we are speaking of the same trade at Qxh1) is something the KG player loves to have happen. Don't you agree?
I dislike King's Gambit for some reason...
i like it,because its very strong opence when you are white
Just play it. It's fun. And of course 3.Nf3 and 3.Bc4 are only two options...
What is queens gambit? I know kings gmabit, whats Queens Gambit?
Anyone who wants to play the KG can challenge me no matter the rating, but PLEASE send me a message first. No more then 10 games. That would be 5 double games or 10 singles. These would be ALL KG accepted!
“It's always better to sacrifice your opponent's men”(Savielly Tartakover)
I love the KG, in all shapes and sizes, would play it against anybody (and have done on this site). Sure you can lose games, but you can also secure some hugely satisfying victories. It's rarely a draw.
Fischer's d6 is by no means a refutation!
IS WRITING IN ALL CAPS A GOOD PRACTICE
Join Chess.com for free to add your comment! Already a member? Then login now to comment.