10928 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Backgammon, Yatzy, and more!
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
My favorite variation of the Englund-Gambit:
Sure...its not fully sound...
The advantage of this Gambit:
- you get a slight advantage in development
- you get open diagonals for both bishops
- you get open files for your rooks
- you force a "closed"-game player into an open game
- you have some nice opening traps
Is this enough compensation for the pawn?
Whats your opinion?
Someone, who has experiences with these opening?
I like it. I played a bunch of quick games with the following line, and I think black may be slightly better......
An interesting line, but 6.Bg5 is not so good, better is 6.Qc1 as you stated in your comment. I prefer 4...Nc6 instead of 4...Nd7, f.e.
4.e4 is a bad Philidor (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 Bg4?! 4.de5).
4.e4 is also fine as an answer to 3...Nc6, but apparently 4.Bg5 is quite close to the definition of a free pawn.
Bad Philidor???...cant take you for serious...the Blackburne-Gambit out of the Philidor is absolutely sound and thats theoretically proofed (f.e. according to Harding)
- quick piece development
- pressure against the e4-pawn
-vis-a-vis Rd8 vs. Qd1
I dont know what you expect more from a gambit...winning forced in 10 moves?
It's quite apparent that your definition of seriousness is severely lacking, then.
Suffice that you take Harding's analyses for real.
maybe...it would be boring, if your opinion would be the benchmark for gambits...please stay at your standard openings, where your support is really useful, but stop posting unserious comments about unorthodox openings.
To spare you from Google searches: On your #5 position, try finding even a half-decent move for Black after 8.Nd4. Best is likely retreating to e6, but after 9.0-0 intending Nd5 or Ncb5, only a fool would like to have Black.
An unorthodox opening is vastly different from an unsound one. Apparently you cannot tell the difference.
How about 4. h3 in response to Bg4. (and if Bh5, then g4 or Bxf3, exf3) Surely somone must have played 4.h3?
8.Nd4 seems to be a good choice for White...but maybe i can take on e2 instead of retreat...?
as long as Black has not castled short, i would retreat to h5, no fear about 5.g4...
@Dark_Falcon: "I prefer 4...Nc6 instead of 4...Nd7, f.e." The idea of 4...Nd7 was to blockade the possible coming exd6 - d7+, drawing black's bishop back and also denying the tempo gaining capture of Bxd6. But you're right, the knight is probably better placed on c6.
OK, got it...sounds reasonable...
If you like to take on e2, then you'd rather substitute 0-0-0 with Ngf6:
7...Ngf6 8.Nd4 Bxe2 9.Qxe2 Bb4 followed by a swap on c3 (the line is given by Khalifman in the first volume of his "opening according to Anand" series), when Black is still a pawn down, but at least he can claim it's doubled.
Having the same position with long castle is out of the question- white will place a rook on b1, and the doubled pawns will prove being another plus for white's position.
White is fine and seems to be just a pawn up. Ok his dark squared bishop is meh right now but thats about all Black has and it won't be permanent.
Do you see anything else for Black? He still has to develop his kingside. d5 in order to free the B will have to be played. I don't forsee some quick kill coming up. Of course, theres still chess to be played but white is fine. White also has h4 with the threat of Bh3.
Harding sold a lot of books back when there weren't many chess books to be had, before the internet. His openings books were a decent introduction to the opening for a club player, but it was never the sort of advice you could rely upon.
He was not well respected back then, either.
So if Black gives up a pawn, he gets a move of development for it, roughly a single tempo, two if White dawdles. The old rule of thumb is three tempi = a pawn, if you get that your sac is sound.
But you have to have more than a tempo or two. You need some plan of attack, some pressure to put on White to justify the sac.
I'm not seeing it.
@LavaRook: I agree. In fact, in your line, I think white can play 9.h4 immediately and if 9...O-O-O 10.e4, with Bh3 threatened. Maybe after 8.g5 black should just play h4. He might be able to use h5 for the bishop later. But I don't think this position is worth a pawn for black, and h4 may just become a target.
Just looking at the first 3 moves of this gambit--it cannot be sound.
My guess is with best play for both sides--it loses--and I will admit to not having analyzed it at all. There is simply not enough compensation for the Pawn.
General chess principal is you need one more tempo for the Pawn and you do not have this tempo. And that should make all the difference in the world.
To be fair, Dark_Falcon does state right in his first post that the opening is not fully sound. The Englund Gambit has always been considered suspect by many players. Breyer once jokingly remarked "After 1.e4, white's game is in it's last throes." With the Englund, a lot of people feel the same way about black's 1...e5. I play it myself once in a while, because on my level, which is roughly the equivalent on the evolutionary scale of a flatworm, it's a lot of fun.
Weed & Chess
by chakiejan 4 minutes ago
kindle fire login issues
by JagdeepSingh 7 minutes ago
Best Profile pictures
by 1NaturalDisaster 8 minutes ago
Most Important Chess Players
by liveink 10 minutes ago
by dashkee94 10 minutes ago
1001-2000 worst things to do while playing chess
by ChessPlayinDude47 13 minutes ago
Playing 1. e4 as White
by yedddy 13 minutes ago
50move rule question
by wanmokewan 20 minutes ago
9/2/2015 - Methodical Trap
by Gienevieve 20 minutes ago
Was Deep Blue cheating ("GM intervention") in 1997 against Kasparov?
by yedddy 21 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2015 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!