Hi,

I was just wondering what everyone thought about black's best response to the King's Gambit main line (1. e2-e4...e7-e5, 2. f2-f4...e5xf4, 3. Ng1-f3...)

My personal opinion is the moveset 1. e2-e4...e7-e5, 2. f2-f4...e5xf4, 3. Ng1-f3...d7-d6 (I believe Bobby Fischer once claimed this to be the refutation of the Main Line). I scored big using this variation back on chess.ac.

Any thoughts?

 

I think white's trouble began with 5.h4 but NCO and MCO gives this as the main line. MCO is never helpful for opening analysis, I think I should throw it out. But NCO gives 9.g3 with unclear complications. Point of g3 is to reclaim f4 and solve problem of what the knight on e2 is actually doing. I think this position is play more in corrpondence my database turns up only 3 games. And out of those 3 games only 1 GM Game Shulman - Sulskis Minsk 1996. Sulkis play fxg3 and found out his pieces were misplaced. So f3 looks to be correct. 9...f3 10.Nf4 black pieces are poorly placed to organize pressure against white's center. So Black needs to rearrange his pieces I feel white most likely has 3 tempi for the pawn but if black redeploys effectively he should be winning. This was the problem with Fischer he over values material in complicated positions what may work for him may not work for you.

MCO and NCO have 8...c6 instead of ...Be6 so this could be the reason for reduce number of games in my database. yep that's the reason, now there is 28 games and more than 1 GM game. Unless you find something with black in this line I would recommend switching to 8...c6. 

 

materialkiller wrote:

I think white's trouble began with 5.h4 but NCO and MCO gives this as the main line. MCO is never helpful for opening analysis, I think I should throw it out. But NCO gives 9.g3 with unclear complications. Point of g3 is to reclaim f4 and solve problem of what the knight on e2 is actually doing. I think this position is play more in corrpondence my database turns up only 3 games. And out of those 3 games only 1 GM Game Shulman - Sulskis Minsk 1996. Sulkis play fxg3 and found out his pieces were misplaced. So f3 looks to be correct. 9...f3 10.Nf4 black pieces are poorly placed to organize pressure against white's center. So Black needs to rearrange his pieces I feel white most likely has 3 tempi for the pawn but if black redeploys effectively he should be winning. This was the problem with Fischer he over values material in complicated positions what may work for him may not work for you.

MCO and NCO have 8...c6 instead of ...Be6 so this could be the reason for reduce number of games in my database. yep that's the reason, now there is 28 games and more than 1 GM game. Unless you find something with black in this line I would recommend switching to 8...c6. 

 

---

So, you would recommend 8. ...c6 as opposed to Be6? With Be6, I was hoping to get some better development with an added presence in the center (my main objective was the hope that he would eventually move his bishop to c2 and trap himself - which he did) and put more pressure on his kingside, which was already in some trouble after I jammed up his knight. Perhaps I'm not looking as far ahead into it as you are, but what would be the benefits of c6 over Be6, if I may ask?

Tijaro wrote:

---

So, you would recommend 8. ...c6 as opposed to Be6? With Be6, I was hoping to get some better development with an added presence in the center (my main objective was the hope that he would eventually move his bishop to c2 and trap himself - which he did) and put more pressure on his kingside, which was already in some trouble after I jammed up his knight. Perhaps I'm not looking as far ahead into it as you are, but what would be the benefits of c6 over Be6, if I may ask?

 

---

 Be6 better development?! You use the word better development is the bishop really doing more on e6 than c8. Just ask the knight on b8. NO, remember just developing a piece is bad thinking it needs to being doing the right job at the right time. Now the knight has no useful square other than a6 due to the threat of d5. Just because you place a piece in the center doesn't mean you gain control of the center. Here the bishop is blocking black's trump card the half-open e-file. Which if black wants to start an attack against White king would be nice to use.

 I think I just answer the benifits of ...c6 black is able to use the e-file and keeps his option open on how to more effectively deploy his queenside pieces. I use to have analysis on this opening but computer crashes cause me to lose it, and I might of back it up but I doubt it. I was looking at HIARCS opening book and has lots of interesting ideas in it - which might be hard to understand. There is another way to cover the d5 square 8...Ne7

                             

 

 

 

 

 

 

      

       
 

 I don't know wish line I prefer, I do however know that I have a few nice wins with 8...Ne7. Don't ask for the scores, sorry I don't have the time to find them -- maybe if I was interested in playing this but the rarity of the king's gambit makes it impractical. If you like 8...Ne7 White most likely will reply with the stronger 9.Qd2!

 

Okay, I see...

materialkiller wrote:

I think white's trouble began with 5.h4 but NCO and MCO gives this as the main line. MCO is never helpful for opening analysis, I think I should throw it out. But NCO gives 9.g3 with unclear complications. Point of g3 is to reclaim f4 and solve problem of what the knight on e2 is actually doing. I think this position is play more in corrpondence my database turns up only 3 games. And out of those 3 games only 1 GM Game Shulman - Sulskis Minsk 1996. Sulkis play fxg3 and found out his pieces were misplaced. So f3 looks to be correct. 9...f3 10.Nf4 black pieces are poorly placed to organize pressure against white's center. So Black needs to rearrange his pieces I feel white most likely has 3 tempi for the pawn but if black redeploys effectively he should be winning. This was the problem with Fischer he over values material in complicated positions what may work for him may not work for you.

MCO and NCO have 8...c6 instead of ...Be6 so this could be the reason for reduce number of games in my database. yep that's the reason, now there is 28 games and more than 1 GM game. Unless you find something with black in this line I would recommend switching to 8...c6. 

 

---

There is nothing wrong with 5 h4 and there isnt a better move for white in the position according to my database. After 9 g3 (Bd2 is bad) white is scoring ok in this line with the B/e6 or with the p/c6 and the B/c8 .

While it's all in good fun picking apart some of the less practical moves I made in that match, my main question here was the use of 3. ...d6 as an acceptable refutation of the King's Gambit Main Line.

Personally, I found it to be very effective in several of my real-time matches (the game listed above was my only example from online) when going against King's Gambit as black, but I was just wondering what other players thought of it (I generally don't see many people using that particular variation - and to be perfectly honest, I don't know if it even has a name!).

Any thoughts on 3. ...d6 in particular?

3...d6 isn't a refutation. Many improvements have been found for white since Fischer wrote his article.

 

It also isn't bad for black.

It's a good, complex line.

Yep, I thought it was decent - I also figured that there have been more modern developments since Fischer's analysis of this line as well.

But I'm also interested in specifics: What's good about it, what's bad about it? What interesting lines could it lead into based upon white's response (I can't seem to find very much on this line in any of the books I have read...)?

(Also, thanks to everyone who has so far contributed to this topic post, your comments are well-received and most helpful! )

I read Fischer's Bust to the King's Gambit.  He said that 3. g5 was a good move, but it allowed White to have "drawing chances".  Then he presents his argument for 3. d6.  After g3, Fischer said that the position was "unclear."  How is this better than giving White drawing chances.  The Fischer Defense is a good response to the King's Gambit, but Fischer's logic is severely flawed.