14143 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?
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!
I will give this a start:
1. Latvian Gambit 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 f5
2. Albin Counter Gambit 1. d4 d5 2. c4 e5
Does the jerome gambit count?
and what about the halloween gambit?
Must be well known gambitss and I know "well known" is a matter of opinion.
This leaves out making it rain and Scot baio and I am not sure about Jerome or Halloween.
On others mentioned Kings Gambit is sound Wing Gambit is probably unsound
elephant gambit unsound--smith morra probably unsound Englund gambit no opinion.
Suggestion when gambit mentioned give the first moves--such as what are moves for jerome gambit and halloween?
Throw this in there: an old chess adage says no position is bad unless the opponent can take advantage of it. So an unsound gambit at certain higher levels of play can be a sharp weapon lower down. So on the one hand we might all like to play 'sound' chess, on the other hand there's the fun of the game - and winning however you can.
I think he was mentioning in general. But it is true - a BDG at 1100 rating is probably plenty good.
Yes, an unsound gambit can be a good weapon at lower levels of play but I am interested in which gambits are sound at the highest levels of play.
I am guessing the Jerome Gambit and the Halloween Gambit are unsound.
Since I have been a correspondence player most of my life--where each side may have days to make or consider one move--you will not see many unsound gambits in higher level correspondence chess.
Yes, I considered that such might be the case. But I wanted to throw my post in there because I thought it would be a worthwhile point to make in a discussion of gambits, and sound and unsound that is viewed by many levels of player (like lowly me).
You don't see gambits played so often by very strong players because sound or not, most players they face are also strong and experienced enough to know how to face them. At higher levels, you will far more often see pawn sacrifices in the early middle game, because these are original and the opponent will likely be surprised.
You consider the smith morra worse than the englund? That's surprising, personally I think the smith morra is sound but gives black a good game, while I can't see why anyone would play the englund.
And when you see pawn sac's in the early middle game--it is too late to call them "gambits" [i think]
Anyone have what they regard as refutations against some of these gambits?
By "refutations" I do not mean equalizing lines--I mean lines where the defense to the gambit has very good winning chances.
Why is albin counter gambit unsound?
Well yes the word "gambit" does have more than one meaning. I am trying to use the meaning as a sacrifice of material in the opening of a game.
Albin Counter Gambit
Na5 f attacked c6
6. Qa4 is hardly ever played. More common is 6. Nbd2.
In chess.com's database Ng5 is never played, the only move out of 2 games is 0-0. Neither is that position reached in shredders database. Or chesstempo's. Even in chess365's big database including non-master games Ng5 is never played. I don't see how a line that is rarely if ever played could possibly be shown to refute an opening. It needs to be tested OTB before it can be claimed that the albin is unsound.
Black also has at least 2 other tries, 5... Nge7 and 5...Bg4. To claim the albin is unsound these need to be refuted as well.
Personally, I think the albin is dubious but not unsound, and it would take hundreds of pages of analysis to refute (if it is in fact refutable), not one puzzle.
Making the Chess.com Forums Better
by RonaldJosephCote a few minutes ago
A group for left handed players
by ozzie_c_cobblepot 3 minutes ago
abuse of the holiday button
by ozzie_c_cobblepot 4 minutes ago
Leechers of chess.com
by ozzie_c_cobblepot 5 minutes ago
Group help II
by hsong1 11 minutes ago
Could a 2000 rated player beat Magnus Carlsen?
by chessredpanda 12 minutes ago
Stuff Non-Chess Players Say
by 3FFA 12 minutes ago
by jphillips 14 minutes ago
Premove for iOS App please
by abbrev 15 minutes ago
3/10/2014 - A Quick End
by woodworker1 16 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2014 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!