what do you think

nice

You really want to know? I think 7. Kf1 is winning for White.

a little analysis

Looks like white is winning after Kf1 to me!

That's...not the Traxler.

What about

yeah with besst play itrs not good. I did beat a hard computer three times with it though! That must mean it refutes 4.Ng5! at least by gavinator standards

I was hoping for a new spaghetti sauce recipe :-(

But a Traxlerish variation is pretty good compensation, although I'm not sure Black gets enough compensation.  It's an interesting idea though.

Gavinator the following is the Traxler and it is good.

i think that it may be ok against a lower rated opponent, but not good otherwise

gavi i think i finally understand you now. you do not understand the concept of compensation well and do not know imbalances. I recommend reading silman's reasses your chess and other books so you can learn about all that

Traxler is flawed according to computer analysis. But since we aren't all computers, it can be tricky in blitz or unexperienced opponents. 

Actually, Ng5 isn't ever going to be refuted because as Gavinator said, it wins a pawn. Although Black has good compensation in lines such as Na5, with development, initative, etc, Ng5 isn't refuted. Why do u think Ng5 is still the main line of the Two knights?

@gavi all you know is attacking compensation, but you dont know anything about gambits and stuff.

@DaBigOne I never said it was the main line

I know, im just saying, if it was refuted, it wouldnt BE the main line

lol gavinator that is why you are not a good chess player and I am recommending you learn how to play chess

Kings gambit, Queens gambit, Scotch gambit! Are u saying they are bad?

Gambits are good, especially if they are positional. If people cant use their positional advantages properly, than thats their problem, they shouldnt be playing it. But if they can use it well, it is a deadly opening to use.

Gavinator. the KG is perfectly playable. the issue is you blindly follow 50 year old theory there yet believe your cutting edge parham pwns. which against people who don't study it it might. however the 50 year old theory you know only applies to 3. Nf3 in the KGA. Fischer ignors 3. Bc4 which allowed him to play it and prove it gave white enough compensation for the pawn. if you do not believe me just look at my current ongoing game vs. something or other from romaina. please do not comment on the forums about that game untill it is complete. but for the link

http://www.chess.com/echess/game.html?id=54269950

anyway. f4 doesn't give away a pawn and open up the kingside for nothing. it opens up lines that lead directly to f7 and it ruins Black's control of the center. even 3. ... d5 in the Bc4 variation doesn't help much. and Qh4+ isn't just laughable to an expeirienced Bc4 player its his dream. Nf6 is the only variation that causes me any problems due to me not being able to develop with tempo like Qh4+, Nc6 is slow, but valid and allows white to develop normally and prepare his attack. whilst Black still has to solve development issues and center control issues.