Forum

Played consulting engines (at a server that allows engines, of course), it finished a few days ago:

I thought this group would appreciate another blog I have done about gambiteer Emil Josef Diemer. Here I have featured another four of his games: 3 Blackmar-Diemer games and 1 Elephant gambit! Enjoy https://www.chess.com/blog/ThePawnSlayer/the-life-and-games-of-emil-josef-diemer-the-madman-of-chess-part-2

Hi all! I decided to play another risky Blackmar-Diemer game in a classical time controls game. My opponent was a strong 10-year junior player who played for the national team for his age group (very strong!). Here I discuss an interesting line against the Tartakover variation: 5...Bf5 by playing Andrew Martin's recommendation Nh4!? instead of the usual main-line with Ne5. Complications ensue with both lines! Enjoy!

I have started a blog series along with my YouTube channel about Emil Diemer. I thought this group might appreciate it : https://www.chess.com/blog/ThePawnSlayer/the-life-and-games-of-emil-josef-diemer-the-madman-of-chess-part-1 Enjoy!

1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 or 1.d4 Nf6 2.f3 d5 3.e4 dxe4 4.Nc3 exf3 Now either: 5.Nxf3 Blackmar-Diemer Gambit, Ryder Gambit 5.Qxf3 Blackmar-Diemer Gambit Accepted After 5.Nxf3: 5...a6 Gedult Variation 5...b6 Ritter Variation 5...Bf5 Gunderam Defense 5...Bg4 6.h3 Teichmann Defense 6...Bh5 Teichmann Defense Declined 6...Bxf3 Teichmann Defense Accepted 5...c5 Kaulich Defense 5...c6 Ziegler Defense 5...e6 Euwe Defense 5...g6 Bogoljubow Defense 5...h5 Rook Pawn Defense 5...h6 Buis Defense | 5...h6 Defense 5...Nc6 Pietrowsky Defense 5...Nbd7 Schuttler Defense Whereas the Blackmar Gambit is: 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.f3

A line that can be used in the case of 1.d4 d5 2.e4 c5 is 3.Bf4: (I´m starting the thread as a way to remember that I have to come back to post more games and analysis here)

OP by A1Rajjpuut Edited for clarity by me --- Hi, I think the truly best way for BDGambiteers to improve not only in our BDG strength but in all important phases of our game would be to run a series of Thematic BDG tournaments open only to us club members until we get the glitches out, playing both White and Black vs. each opponent in say groups of 5 or 6 players. For argument’s sake let us say we offer an initial offering of the 10-12 most common positions we encounter consistent with our strenuous effort to reach 4. f3 ef3 5. NxPf3 BDG The most valuable and popular Black lines are the following 12 battlefields: A. Anti-French BDG (Alapin Gambit?) 1. d4 e6 2. e4 d5 3. Be3 . . . B.Anti-Caro-Kann BDG 1. d4 c6 2. e4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. f3 . . . C.Indian Defenses 1. d4 Nf6 2. f3 d5 3. e4 dxe4 4. Nc3 . . . D. Lemberger Counter-Gambit 1. d4 d5 2. e4 dxe4 3. Nc3 e5?!! 4. . . . E. Zeller Defense may arise in two forms, but usually diverges after 1. d4 d5 2. e4 dxe4 3. Nc3 Bf5 ... or instead from F. 1. d4 d5 2. e4 dxe4 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. f3 Bf5... G. The Euwe D. follows the main line after 4. f3 exf3 5. Nxf3 e6 H. The Bogoljubow D after 5. ... g6 I. The Gunderam D after 5. ... Bf5 J. The most common Mainline D other than the Euwe is the Teichmann D after Black pins the Knight with 5. ... Bg4 and supposedly the most effective Mainline D (the Zeller D) arises after 5. ... c6. Do we have the power to run BDG tournaments? --- I put in diagrams to illustrate the main lines. To answer the question: Any paying individual has the power to run (themed) tournaments. It can be invite only, and invites can be send to all members of a specific club (afaik). Now, all we need is a paying member who's willing to set it up

[COMMENT DELETED]

Here's a few links to some of the limited - but helpful and interesting - material here on the BDG: BDG-101-part-1 BDG-101-part-2 BDG-101-part-3 BDG-101-part-4 Ryder Variation Bill Wall game with the BDG

There've been a few notes posted recently regarding the Ryder Gambit, asking and opining about it soundness or lack thereof. I'd thought I'd offer a little fodder for the discussion. Diemer's own book, Das moderne Blackmar-Diemer Gambit, first arrived in 1957, though my copy is a later edition in 1983. This book is essentially a book on the Ryder Gambit. It's in German, as is appropriate, but it's easy enough to follow and a cheap German-English dictionary allowed me to understand most of the valuable commentary. The games and game pieces are fun to go through, though I doubt the evaluations and analysis are all accurate - no computers to check things with back then. Most other texts on the BDG cover the Ryder, if just to convince you that overall it's bad. The most complete text I have found on that particular gambit is Schiller and Crayton's volume that dates from 1995. Their conclusion is pretty much the same as all the rest: if Black makes a mistake, White can often crush Black, but if Black plays the best line(s), White is simply two pawns down or worse. I will offer the critical line here - at least that claimed critical by Schiller and Crayton. The embedded game is considered the stem game for Black's defeat of White in the Ryder. Of course, the Devil may still be in the details. Just thought I'd like to offer this up for your enjoyment. Long live the BDG! (but maybe not the Ryder variation)

I have a pretty good understanding of the different lines in the BDG, but the line below (to me) feels like it busts the opening. Black enjoys an advantage and there aren't any traps for White. I'm open to counter-arguments...

What do you guys do versus people that play the French? Either they respond to 1.d4 with 1....e6 or they play e6 in response to e4 to use French Defense. The book basically says 'good luck' in response to this, leaving me wondering what I should play against it.

The soundness is the foremost issue for this gambit. What else could be more important? Personally I would never play an opening that I thought allowed my opponent to forcibly win against me with correct play, outside blitz. When I find holes in an opening I play, I devote all my resources to fixing those holes or I drop the opening (much like I dropped the Huebsch). For someone who investigates the BDG for the first time, they can get a dire picture of this gambit. For starters there are no champions of this opening. It's a pretty bad sign when the IMs and GMs who wrote books on the opening (Andrew Martin, Gary Lane, Scheerer) don't even believe in the opening. No strong player uses this opening as their primary answer against rivals. The advocates of the opening, while there are decent numbers of them, are mostly not playes of great import. If this is such a good opening, as some would have you believe, why are none of these people IMs or GMs yet? On the flip side, De Bouver's blog, The Final Theory of Chess, Stefan Buecker's analysis, the rest of ChessPub's analysis, and one's own homebrewed analysis seem to make a reasonable case that White can maybe hold the draw against the most resolute Black defenses. Example: White's long-term compensation against the Teichmann Defense. So there are two very different stories surrounding this gambit. I saw this conversation crop up on the front page and I thought it'd be interesting to have here. What are everyone's thoughts on this debate? How sound do you all think the gambit is? Is the Ziegler defense a refutation? If the gambit works why does it have such a negative reputation? I have my own thoughts, which I'll post later. I'm curious what everyone else thinks though.

We can't deny that at least half the d4 games we end up playing with White will end up being indian games of some sort. So I'd like to brainstorm what the best repertoire would be for Blackmar-Diemer players who encounter an Nf6 player. I think a bad habit people often get into is trying to force these games back into BDG territory with the Paleface attack or the Huebsch Gambit, both of which I consider to be a waste of the White pieces if Black knows the correct response. I think the Huebsch is totally unsound and leaves Black with a useful pawn obstacle on e4 which costs White his initiative to get rid of--and then some. As for the Paleface, I see no reason why Black couldn't go into some sort of Benoni or French where the pawn on f3 is a wasted tempo. Or some kind of d5 and then c5 idea where White's position in the center is held together by a flimsy web of dandelion flowers and angel whispers. In my eternal attempts to stay offbeat I've dabbled with the Trompowsky but ultimately I've stuck with the more aggressive Richter-Veresov to meet King's Indian players. You have to be prepared to give up that Bishop in either line, Ruy Lopez exchange style, depending on what Black does. The Tromp's reputation is solid if a bit unambitious, popular among world GMs and played at all levels. The Veresov has a troublesome W/L rate in most databases that scared me away initially but then you have super-GMs like Aronian using it without any issues. That and it has a killer trap against Nimzo Indian players. I'm up for other ideas though. Anyone play the main lines? Any good gambit paths down the main line? Anyone try b3 or g3 against the Indian game? I'd like to know what other ideas are out there. And if there are a few other Veresov players, what particular lines they play. And of course, if someone disagrees about the Huebsch, by all means prove me wrong.

Post your BDG games here. O'Kelly variation transposition from the Caro-Kann /Slav.

Just wondering what you like to play against c6 on move one. I been trying the play Nc3, Bg5, e3, and f4 (making it like a stonewall attack.) Though I been thinking maybe give e4 a try, but like something different than the usual stuff and keeping with the BDG spirit. Any reconmendations?

Hi all. Here's a recent Vote Chess Games of ours, which I am posting with annotation and comments. Please feel free to post and analyse. This is the Teichman Excahnge variation. THE most common response to the BDG, followed by the Teichman Retreat Variation, Tartakower, Euwe, Vienna and the Lamb/Pietrowsky. BDG Vote Chess Game, Teichman, Bxf6 Variation: http://www.chess.com/votechess/game?id=42644 Our opening play and middlegame play was fine IMHO and we missed 1 tactic in the middlegame 24. Bf5!. Christoph Scheerer reccomends 10. 0-0 as mainline and does mention 10.g4 as a valid sideline which was our choice, as well as it being in Tim Sawyers Keybook. Next game up for analysis is our Tartakower game. http://www.chess.com/votechess/game?id=41916

Hello Everybody, as the title suggests, i am interested in transpositions into the BDG. I try to play attacking chess, but i play 1.e4 rather than 1.d4 usually, so i don't play the BDG that often. But i am thinking about learning the BDG to avoid defensive opening choices against 1.e4, for example: If my opponent tries to avoid theory by playing 1. ... d5 (the Scandinavian), i might transpose to the BDG with 2.d4. Other possibilties: The Caro-Kann Player The French Player So basically my question is: Do you know other possible transpositions for e4 players? Is there a way to play BDG in the Rubinstein French (one might play a3 to prevent Bb4, but it wastes a valuable tempo) Thanks in advance, sirprim P.S.: I already have opening choices against e5/c5 and i play d6/g6 (Pirc/Modern) as black myself, so i am comfortable playing these as white, too. But i want to crack these defensive openings c6/e6/d5