Other than it would not be played? And if it is neither side has a clue?
1.f4 f5 2.e4
Sort:
It is the Duras Gambit declined by transposition. Long live the Fred!
2.e4 is a terrible move
My database calls it the Swiss Gambit, and I think the next moves would probably be something like ...fxe4 3.d3 exd3 4.Bxd3. Resembles stuff like the danish and other gambits that just put you one move up for a developement and attempt to open up the board for good or for bad.
Conquiscador wrote:
It is the Duras Gambit declined by transposition. Long live the Fred!
2.e4 is a terrible move
Actually chessmaster says it's a good try at refuting ...f5. I think the key move is d3, that opens up some lines for white, but it's hard to see why f4 makes white attack so good, if anything it makes it harder to attack by blocking the dark squared bishop.
I guess it is better than I thought. It just looks like white is giving up a pawn for a tempo or two for accelerated development. Seems dubious although it has some poison. But what do I know I never play 1.f4 and I certainly never answered 1.f4 with 1...f5.
Tactchess wrote:
My database calls it the Swiss Gambit, and I think the next moves would probably be something like ...fxe4 3.d3 exd3 4.Bxd3. Resembles stuff like the danish and other gambits that just put you one move up for a developement and attempt to open up the board for good or for bad.
It's more like a reverse from's gambit. Where white does not seek compensation, but instead tries to put his opponent in a trap.
Does anyone know something about that line?