
Englund Gambit Queen Sacrifice Line | GLORIOUS! ❤️🔥
#englundgambit #queensac #romanticstyle
I love the Romantic style of chess, and one of the signature tactics of the style are piece sacrifices. And there is no sacrifice more daring, more audacious, than what Spielmann categorised as “real sacrifices” of a full queen!
A real sacrifice involves a genuine loss of material and involves true risk. One gains “dynamic advantages”, but stated Spielmann, the last of the great Romantic masters:
Their secrets reveal themselves only to the gifted and courageous player, who has strong if controlled self-confidence. The timid player will take to real sacrifices only with difficulty, principally because the risk involved makes him uneasy. (p.5)
Moreover:
The likelihood of success is not necessarily based on positional judgement alone; it may be dependent on various extraneous circumstances. It is possible, for example, to allow for an opponent’s individual failings: to play psychologically… Considered in this light, many combinations can be termed correct in a broader sense even though they may not be able to stand the test of subsequent analysis. We must distinguish between practical and theoretical soundness. (p.40-41)
So, what insights can we glean from Spielmann’s words in the modern day, ninety years after they were published? A few concrete ideas:
- Engine analysis gives us almost instant access to theoretical soundness, but not practical soundness. Engines can sometimes recommend objectively accurate lines that are nonetheless ineffective due to their difficulty to play. Engines also never recommend risky but very effective traps and tactics that are effective against other human players. In essence, the uncritical acceptance of engine recommendations blinds us to the full range of possibilities in chess.
- In practice, especially in casual recreational chess and in shorter time controls, playing psychologically, considering the psychological flow in a game against another human can substantially increase the likelihood of success. In some contexts, the empathy to predict how our opponent will respond, and the imagination and creativity to manipulate this on the board, may be more important than what is objectively the most accurate move.
Those of you who follow my channel will know that I love playing the Englund Gambit with the black pieces against White’s Queen’s Pawn Opening (1. d4 e5). I’ve seen many comments from players of all strengths who derisively label the Englund Gambit as “hope chess” given that there is a clear refutation line, that isn’t difficult to learn. However, from the perspective of Romanticism, it is interesting to reframe that “hope” is one of the principal human values. It represents optimism against adversity, meaningfulness as opposed to nihilism, joy rather than despair. Hope was the gift that remained in Pandora’s box after the evils were released!
In this recent game, I played the Englund Gambit and White clearly knew the refutation line after we entered the Englund Complex (1. d4 e5 2. dxe5 Nc6 3. Nf3 Qe7 4. Bf4 Qb4+). I cover the refutation to the Englund Complex line in my new book, “Become a Chess Assassin!” but to summarise, White needs to find the following three consecutive moves, each of which are rated as “excellent” by the Chess.com analytic engine:
5. Bd2! Qxb2
6. Nc3! Bb4
7. Rb1!

Here, Black has only a single move available to keep their queen (7… Qa3), but White has captured the initiative with a powerful counterattack. White has (8. Nd5), threatening Black’s b4-bishop, and the c7-pawn which would come with an absolute fork of Black’s king and a8-rook. Seemingly, Black has no choice but being forced into a miserable retreat in a losing position, with limited opportunities unless White blunders.
Did I just prove that the Englund Gambit is losing? 🤔
Let us re-evaluate the Englund Gambit and Englund Complex up to turn 7 from a more psychological perspective. Firstly (1… e5) is clearly an inaccuracy, it isn’t “theoretically sound”, but it has a forcing nature. White only captures the theoretical advantage by Accepting the gambit, and in doing so, is likely disallowed access to their planned (1. d4) opening structure (e.g., the Queen’s Gambit, or the London System). Black uses the sacrificed pawn to gain the initiative and launch a rapid attack with their queen with (4… Qb4+) being an absolute triple check! For inexperienced players with White against the Englund Complex, a mistake in the next few moves can be catastrophic: either massive loss of material or even checkmate!
However, if White plays down the Refutation Line, (7. Rb1!) becomes a turning point. As noted previously, the objectively accurate move (7… Qa3) is a path to slow, withering defeat. I recommend, and highlight as a variant in my book, the Romantic path where we hold onto the initiative, and we do so, by sacrificing our queen (7… Qxc3!?). 😚🤌😻

Although the engine disapproves of the “Queen Sacrifice Line” or the “Hambleton Variation” of the Englund Complex, it is surprisingly playable, effective even, and has been used by GM Hambleton, IM Rosen, and a few others in blitz tournaments! The Killer Black Queen of the Englund Complex plays one final definitive strike! If White knows and plays the Refutation Line, then they most likely have experienced and are anticipating an easy mop up with (7… Qa3). The queen sacrifice is like a psychological bomb that shockingly takes away this plan.
The follow up moves are obvious: White captures our queen, and we capture back with check (8. Bxc3 Bxc3+). White must block check with a backwards knight move (9. Nd2) and Black has one of two options. White’s e5-pawn can be captured with either our c3-bishop or the c6-knight. The engine thinks that Bxd5 is slightly better. However, I recommend Nxd5, which is slightly more winning on the Lichess community database. It is also more consistent, from the perspective of psychology: our c3-bishop maintains a pin of White’s d2-knight on their king, which binds up White’s position.
The potential advantages that Black has in the position is that White, who were expecting to have captured the initiative, has no development. White has a damaged queenside, having lost their queen’s bishop and knight, and their d- and b-pawns, leaving isolated a- and c-pawns. Black has more development, an undamaged pawn structure, and numerical superiority of pieces (6 vs 5). Black still has attacking chances and targets: for instance, the pinned d2-knight that is defended only by White’s queen and king, not to mention that White’s king is presently still “smothered”.
White’s awkward position means that their most accurate move, not difficult to find, is to develop their rook with an attack (10. Rb3). Though accurate, it is easy to make a mistake. A common cognitive bias is loss-aversion when ahead; not willing to give up the won material. White’s correct approach was to be willing to trade their rook for one of my minor pieces to simplify, but their avoiding this (13. Re4?) and (14. Ra4??) allowed me to chase their rook, winning tempo and more development! In fact, after (14. Ra4??) the engine gave the advantage to Black at around [-1.5]!
I played (14… Neg4) ostensibly moving my knight out of an attack by White’s f4-pawn, but I’d actually planned to attack White’s f2 square with a mating attack. In the rather unusual position, White missed the checkmate threat, attempted to kick my knight with the feckless (15. h3??) and blundered a delicious checkmate from White’s king being relatively smothered with (15… Bf2#).
Good game, GG!
Game: https://www.chess.com/analysis/library/ynJaYuwz6?tab=analysis
* * *
The big takeaway from this game is to try the Romantic style in chess! Engine analysis is a fantastic and useful tool, but there is a lot more to chess than accuracy and trying to emulate the computer. And to the Englund Gambit critics, knowing the Refutation Line is very important, but that doesn’t make you invulnerable, especially against the Black Queen Sacrifice! 🤩
Learn more about the Englund Gambit/Complex, its refutation, and variants, including the anti-refutation Hambleton Variation in “Become a Chess Assassin! Learn to play the best chess opening attacks.”
Note: earlier today, electronic chess board reviewer Rolan, of the “All Things Awesome” YouTube channel published a review of the book! Check it out and subscribe to his channel! 🤩👍
