Forgotten opening tricks & gambits from the romantic era - Viable or not?♟

Depending on age and how long one has been playing chess, everyone has some memories of the Romantic era of chess when the so-called gambits were at their peak. The goal of gambits can be summed up in one sentence: sacrifice material to gain time. Who could forget Paul Morphy in the mid-19th century, whose name was immortalized by numerous dazzling miniature games? Back then, the all-out attacking style of play wasn't only characteristic of individual chess players, but of the entire chess community. This style of play was closely intertwined with various gambits. You might be wondering how this image is related to the topic, but I promise it will become clear soon! 🙂

You might ask, where are players like Morphy today, and why do we rarely see games like those immortalized by these chess classics, or gambits in general? With the emergence and continuous dominance of engines, gambits have increasingly been pushed out of competitive chess, and it can be said that at the highest levels, they have become almost extinct. Truth be told, this is not surprising at all, as anyone can easily access the strongest engine programs today, even through a simple phone. This has resulted in the realization among the general public that computers have already refuted the vast majority of gambits. However, it's still my personal experience that when it comes to openings, my students most often ask me about various gambits and what I think of them. Of course, I could tell them to forget about them because, with today's computer analysis, they can no longer be considered as viable openings. Nevertheless, I don't say that. Why? Because I don't want to deprive them of the joy of creating something unique, a feeling that can only be achieved through gambits. It's the euphoric experience of delivering a checkmate with just a few pieces while the opponent's army watches helplessly. So, where do we stand with gambits? 

I believe that most people play chess because they love the game and want to enjoy themselves during play. That's why I confidently recommend to my students that they choose openings in which they feel comfortable and enjoy playing, even if those openings may not be considered correct according to computer analysis. I've always thought that with diligent practice, you can achieve a high level with practically any opening repertoire. So, if someone doesn't plan to become a professional chess player for a living, it would be a shame to deprive themselves of the joys that gambits can offer. In this regard, I have a good story to share 🙂

One day, I came across a foreign article that referred to the move 1.h4 as the "Kádas Opening." This intrigued me, so I did some research and was surprised to find that in many places, indeed, the move 1.h4 is referred to as the "Kádas Opening." Having had the opportunity to get to know and maintain a good relationship with Gábor Kádas as a child, I knew that he favored this move, but I didn't know that it was internationally associated with his name. At that time, Kádas Gábor was a strong FIDE Master known nationwide for his unconventional openings. I had met him several times as a child, played against him, and even had the chance to analyze with him on multiple occasions. Once, during a team championship match, we played a quick draw against each other, after which we sat down to play some blitz games. I knew that 1.h4 was his favorite weapon, so even before the games, I started to think about how I could best exploit the weaknesses of this move. I wanted to find something to incorporate into the opening that would make this move appear entirely out of place. I realized that almost all of my openings with black were built around fianchetto setups (g6-Bg7), which would be problematic because the h4-h5 attack fits perfectly into those setups. So, I thought about how I could counter this. 

As a young and ambitious kid, full of confidence (and a bit of ego), I was certain that such cheap opening tricks wouldn't work on me, and I was determined to prove that these 1.h4 nonsense openings had no legitimacy. Little did I know that it would work out so well that I had to resign after a few moves… 😀

My personal opinion is that practically any opening is playable up to a very high level. Even gambits are no exception. Of course, this doesn't apply to everyone, and those who aspire to become professional, results-oriented, competitive chess players cannot be encouraged to study dubious openings because it would likely not be profitable. However, for hobby chess players, it is definitely worth choosing openings in which they feel comfortable and enjoy playing, even if those openings may not be considered correct according to computer analysis. 

But most importantly, choose openings that bring you the most joy; after all, that's the ultimate goal of the game!