A general Study on the King's Gambit

test of what exactly????

I would like to say that after accepting the gambit and playing f pawn to protect it and e pawn to protect that, you have a strong position and enemy needs to sacrifice and you simply win an easy pawn

pfren wrote:

I see no point posting such silly games as in #99. One good move (9...Qf5) followed by two direct blunders (10...Nc6 and 11...d5), then white nicely cooperating (up to the point of not picking a free piece after 20...Bg7?? 21 Qd6) - this can be useful only as proof that both the opponents were total beginners.

Notice I said it was a casual game, and second often, I only posted because it was relavent, black could have also won the exchange a few times around move 25 with Ng3+. I also said that I didn't care about the result, and I am not a complete beginner. I know how to play at a decent level, so if you are willing to stop being so patronizing and offer constructive criticism then please do so, otherwise leave

And for proof I actually can play http://www.chess.com/echess/game?id=87088728

Pretty much the right way to post a game. Yes I agree that the best moves weren't played in that double muzio, but that's the double muzio for you.

Could be possible

Thanks for the post jetfighter...the job is done...

I play the king's gambit something whith the same result than other opening but I take more fun!

You are more than welcome... If you've read the first few pages you can get an idea of how exhausting my research was, just imagine if I had done the Najdorf or Slav defense

yeah that ould not be fun

There are so many great games played with the King's gambit. You want to play such games (albeit in more modest fashion), then you have to try it out! eg.

https://www.chess.com/blog/neilparker62/sandwiched

Ajian você deve ficar calado! É deixar os especialistas emitirem uma opinião precisa acerca do KG. Olhe para seus pés seu pé de tubarão sem noção!

Has (NM) ajian been here since 2014?

I agree with IM PFren.  2.  ... Bc5 is fine and playable.

The KG isn’t about objective strength, it’s about surprise factor, so I can agree with this statement.

The KG is not about surprise factor.

Any 1...e5 player that does his homework will have a line against the KG.

Saying that the KG has surprise value is like saying the Morra Gambit or Milner-Barry Gambit has surprise value. To an 800 player it might, but not to any decent chess player. You want surprise value against a 1...e5 player, 1.Nc3 e5?! 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 has surprise value. Black would never believe the number of knight tactics in that line.

I would disagree, both with the premise and with the comparison between the KG and the SM or MB. The KG is infinitely more complex than the SM or MB, which is why it does have surprise factor. Yes, any Open Game player worth their salt will have a KG line, but that’s like saying any e4 player will have a Philidor line. It’s almost negligible considering the amount of options your opponent has to drastically change the opening. In the KGA, the three big options are the Bishop’s Gambit, the Knight’s Gambit, and 3. Nc3, each of which lead to a multitude of deeper and more complex gambits. Black also has the option to play the Falkbeer, the Classical, the Keene, the Queen’s Knight Defense, and the Petrov, to name a few. There’s not a great reason to play any of these besides surprise factor, as the KGA is very nearly winning with perfect play for Black, but the amount of theoretical knowledge necessary to make that happen is impossible with the rarity of the KG in the first place. Thusly, one plays a less solid sideline to avoid getting outbooked in some random gambit later on down the road.

i dont play the kings gambit anymore because i can never get consistent looking positions compared to the ruy lopez or some other opening

This is correct. Am shocked ThrillerFan would say such an ignorant thing.

Claiming it's like the Smith Morra is one thing, talking about an 800 player is so ridiculous.

At the elite level it does badly, at the sub-elite level it does brilliant for white.

It was a main weapon of Spassky for god's sake.

The Bishop's gambit is a part of the King's gambit surely.

ive done hours of self analysis of the bishops gambit and whtie typically gets the pawn back but with a lot of weaknesses. so if you want to get the pawn back then id say play the bishops gambit

the Nc6-Nf6-Bb4 system shuts down the bishops gambit completely. how did they determine the bishops gambit is better than the knight variation?