3. Bxf7+

Hello chess.com members!

I'd need some help to further analyze the Bxf7+ sacrifice openeing. Indeed, today in live chess I lost because my oponent played with such sacrifice:

I think that from the begining I was lost because of 2 Bc5, wasn't I?

I tried to then reproduce such sacrifice an another game (my oponent hadn't played 2 Bc5), and couldn't get any advantage of it (but not being very familiar with it, I obviously didn't play the best moves), see:

http://live.chess.com/live?v=2014040303#g=771878953

Thanks doomgrace, hence actually my big mistake was 4... g6, leading to 65 Qxe5 forking bishop and rock!

I prefer 2 ... Qg5 but good fun in quick play is:

3. Bxf7 is very weak. It gives away a piece for nothing. 

2. ...Qg5? is not good.

Here is a complete analysis:

1. Take the freaking bishop.

2. Do not blunder.

3. Pick the free point.

That's all, mission accomplished.

This is more of a tactics problem than an opening one. 

I do remember some years ago an IM losing a blitz game to an engine cheater that played 1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Ne4 3.d3 Nxf2. Black actually won that game with an attack.

2 ... Qg5 is ok. 3 ... Qxg2 is not. I play 3 ... Qg6.

Indeed, " 2...Qg5 is OK".

The only slight problem is that after 3.Nf3 Qg6, almost any reasonable white move (4.0-0, 4.Nc3, 4.d3, 4.d4) leaves black in a pitiful state.

Priceless. Steps one and three are easy, they only need to be done once per game. Step two is hard, we need to do it at every move!

@guilledefrancia - Now I will reveal to you the essence of post-mortem analysis: It is "backwards analysis". What you do is go to the end of the line, where white is winning, and step backwards, at every black move you ask, "What could I have done differently *right now* to avoid my fate?"

So, you start up an engine. I am using DeepShredder13, but I guess there should be an engine on chess.com.

Go to the final position, engine confirms +-.

Now back up to 5.Qxe5. The double-attack is "winning" material for white, but white is currently down material. Engine suggests two lines for black (1) 5...Bxf2+ 6.Kxf2 Nf6 = (2) 5...Nf6 6.Qxc5 Nxe4 +=. Basically, you panicked and gave the rook instead of the bishop, when you could have had equality.

Back up again to 4.Qh5+. Engine suggests two good moves for black (1) 4...Kf8 5.Qxe5 d6 -+ (2) 4...Ke6 5.Qf5+ Kd6 =+. The second line is madness, the king should not go to the middle of the board in the opening. But the first line is very solidly winning, because 5.Qxe5 attacks only *one* piece (c5) instead of *two* (c5 and h8).

Back up again to 3.Bxf7+. Engine says 3...Kxf7 is the only move. No surprise there, we cannot just let white take a free pawn and force our king to move!

Conclusion: If there is anything wrong with 2...Bc5, it is *not* 3.Bxf7+?. As pfren said, take the freaking bishop!

A lot of sub 1200 make this sac

and they play it as if it were a fantastic innovation of their invention.

5.Nxe5? Nxe5 and White's best option is Be2 leaving him a piece down.

The correct way to play is 5. h3 and if 5...Bh5 then 6.Nxe5! works because if 6...Nxe5 7. Qxh5 Nxc4 8.Qb5+ and you pick up the knight