Forum

In the King's Gambit thematic game, we initiated the Mason-Keres Gambit. Black's 5th move was Bd6 instead of the more often played Bg4+. This move isn't unknown and can possibly transpose into the main line. I decided to post a few games from both lines here so we might have a better idea what to expect. Bg4+ line: Bg4+ line: Bg4+ line: Bd6 line (6.d4): Bd6 line (6.Nf3): Bd6 line (6.d4):

Could anyone post a diagram of Bob Fischer's famous game in which he played his defense in KGA ? Thanks !

the KG can be, not only very trappy, but susceptible to poor moves by those unfamiliar with it. After playing this game against an otherwise relatively decent player, I though it might be educational to post games that make use of built-in traps or take advantage of poor moves in the opening.

I have a chess app for my cell phone and decided to play a game against it, this is what one game out of many. set to its most difficult, I had white in a KG, if anyone wants to help analyse go ahead, the opening looks rather intriguing

I played this before one of my college classes.

Here i had posted game for which i am really happy that i win, and i would like you to comment where i could play better. I hope you will post some games as well so we could learn something from others s games

When I first started playing the King's Gambit, oh so many years ago, my "bête noire" was the Cunningham Defense. It seemed no matter how I tried to maneuver around it, I ended up worse off. I'm not one for memorizing lines or for studying openings deeply as I play chess for fun, not for work, but the Cunningham forced me to look at master games for some understanding (I do look at a lot of games). First some background for those interested in the texture as well as the sustenance.The Cunningham Defence, 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 Be7, is named after the Scotsman Alexander Cunningham, "the celebrated editor and emendator of Horace" ("Q. Horatii Flacci Poemata"), living at the Hague where he taught both the civil and canon laws in the early 18th century ( not to be confused with the Scottish historian of the same name who authored the great book "History of Great Britain" and who was partially educated in Holland). Originally called, "Three Pawn's Gambit" by it's inventor , Captain Joseph Bertin (1690-1736 - who self-published a book called, "The noble Game of Chess: printed for the author, and sold only at Slaughter's Coffee-house, in St. Martin's Lane." in 1735. ), it was played more frequently by Cunningham who was considered by many to be the best chess player in all of Europe in the early 1800's. Philidor, who came on the scene more than15 years after Cunningham's death in Dec. 1830 (born 1654), named the moves given above after Cunningham. (the Three Pawn Gambit is now a variation of the Cunningham/Bertin Defense: 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 Be7 4. Bc4 Bh4+ 5. g3 fxg3 6. O-O gxh2+ 7. Kh1)A little more history: quoted from "Chess" by Richard Twiss 1787 Dr. Steuart used often to play with him [Cunningham], at Lord May's, at the game of Checs, which he understood better than any man in England, in his time. Mr. Cunningham was domesticated with Lord Sunderland, and the Duke of Argyle; and was no less acceptable as an eminent player at Chess than as a critic, and a man of general knowledge and information. When Lord Sunderland was at the Hague, he contracted a particular intimacy with Mr. Cunningham, as they were both remarkable Chess-players. Whenever his Lordship was at leisure, he either drove to Cunningham's lodgings, which were at some distance, or sent his carriage for him. After playing for a course of time, Lord Sunderland land discovered, that he who was jolted in the carriage before they fat down, was always sure to lose every game: for which reason, he gave over going to Cunningham's, but always sent for him, and always beat him, to his no small astonishment, as he was conscious that he understood the game as well as his adversary. At last, when he was very much out of humour, Lord Sunderland told him the trick, and Cunningham insisted, that they should drive to one another's lodgings alternately, which confirmed his Lordship's observation, and restored Cunningham to his former level; for, from that time, they won and lost alternately. This fact, which appears not at all incredible, for the streets of the Hague were not, in the last century, so smooth as those of London are at present, proves how nicely the capacities of Sunderland and Cunningham were balanced against each other. While Mr. Cunningham resided at the Hague, a German Prince, hearing of our author's great skill in the game of Chess, came to that city with a view of playing with him at that truly noble amusement. The Prince, whose name is not mentioned, informed Mr. Cunningham, by a note, of the purpose of his coming to the Hague. Mr. Ogilvie, lord of Cluny, a Scotch Gentleman in the Dutch service, who passed with many for little better than an ingenious madman, happened to be with Mr. Cunningham when he received the note, to whom he said, "That he did not choose to risk his reputation, for the knowledge of the game of Chess, with a person whom he did not know; and wished, that Cluny would go and play a game or two with the Prince, in the character of one of Mr. Cunningham's disciples." Cluny agreed to go; and Mr. Cunningham is said to have written to the Prince to this purpose: That although he had the honour of receiving his Highness's invitation to play a game at Chess with him, he could not accept of that honour, as business of a particular nature would not permit him at that time; but rather than his Highness should be disappointed, he had sent one of his scholars to give him some entertainment that evening: and that, if his scholar should be beaten, he would do himself the honour of waiting on him (the Prince) next day, and would play with him as many games as he should choose. Cluny accordingly went, and beat the Prince every game they played. Early next morning, the Prince left the Hague, sensible, that if he was shamefully defeated by the scholar, he had, if possible, still less chance of success with the master. It is a fact, that may be depended on, that Mr. Cunningham and Cluny never played so much as a single game at Chess during their whole lives ; and that Mr. Cunningham was esteemed a much better player than Cluny." A letter from a Clergyman of high reputation of the Church of Scotland," is then quoted thus: "Cunningham, the critic, and editor of Horace, was the best player at Chess in Europe. His grand nephew, George Logan, was so proud of this talent of his uncle's, that that he pretended to have inherited from him, what, I dare say, was only imitation, a very great turn for all games in which thinking is concerned, such as Chess, Whist, &c. and believed it to be connected with superior genius, till he found that women and fools could beat him." This Mr. Cunningham died in Scotland in 1732, aged above eighty years. [this is inaccurate: he died in December, 1730] Hopefully in this thread we'll discuss the Cunningham and White's options.

So I finally got a few real games in the modified Muzio I have somewhat wasted my time in analyzing. and I had tons of fun! I also propose the name Seattle Gambit for this.

So these are some recent games with the KG. Next game Why you never play f6 against the KG. Last game.

I wouldnt say any moves were brilliant. My opponent blundered. Maybe he was over confident.

http://www.chess.com/echess/game?id=122681026

I think we should have a thead for each Team match and Vote game to analyse what we did, and so we can improve our play, and in the case of Vote Chess, our communication and processes. So this is the KGA Challenge thread. Here are my completed games.

This game I think is a good one until move 26

I will do a quick analysis the point is for this to be a post mortem.

Hello, I would like to say that for the most part vote chess goes well, but as a game that I am currently taking part in has demonstrated I think we need to have some basic ground rules. 1. Be Respectful. Fairly simple as they would say on Breaking Bad, DBAA 2. When suggesting a move, provide a reason for it. This is to show a reasoning that can be backed up and critiqued. for example don't just say I suggest Be7... say I suggest Be7 because it is mate. 3. wait until there is fairly solid analysis on all candidate moves, and prefferably until we have come to a consensus on which candidate moves are playable to vote. 4. Don't get mad just because your move wasn't picked. it is not a reflection on what we think of you or what we think of your move, maybe there was something better. 5. Don't be afraid to be wrong. thats how we learn, and sometimes in being wrong you might just open up a different even better move. 6. Don't be afraid to suggest a move that looks like only a crazy person would play it. This is the Kings gambit after all and most of the chess world calls us crazy for playing it anyway so why not sac a knight in the opening! thanks Ben

The current mainline, according to the 15th edition of Modern Chess Openings, is here: As a representative and huge fan of the opinions of Houdini 1.5a (64bit), I would like to advocate a new variation to that line: The point Black is trying to achieve with this line is to get closer to establishing a slight edge in development -- and, eventually, hoping for an endgame that will favor the dark-square Bishop. It simplifies the position more than MCO's recommendation. Any comments?