The Budapest is basically refuted.
Maybe, but certainly not by assuming Black will play 6...Bxc3+ when he is not forced to.
That move order is not typical but black always eventually plays that. You could just leave the bishop there until it's not pinning anymore but what would that accomplish? The pawn structure is the one hope black has so not taking is even worse than the line I gave.
against 1. d4 do I play ...d5 or ...Nf6. that seems rather limited, for me its niether, I play ...f5
Nf6 AND KID
Indeed... nobody will force Black to play good moves.
If that variation was obligatory, then I would happily adopt the Budapest as Black. The problem is that white has better continuations than keeping the pawn and severely damaging his queenside.
Black is doing awful there.Also, from moves 2 through 10 there are absolutely zero improvements for black. (Obviously there are several improvements on move 2.) If Qe7 then Rc1 and I'll let you figure out why that's bad for black.pfren please provide the better continuation. I hope you aren't referring to the mainline stuff where white keeps only a tiny edge and has to deal with a rook lift that gives black some attacking chances.
I am referring to the "silent" refutation 4.Nf3 (4...Bc5 5.e3).
White does not care about keeping his extra pawn, let alone allowing Black developing his pieces at active squares. White wants to castle fastm and then developing his bishop at b2, when Black's position is simply structurally worse. GM Kiril Georgiev has suggested this plan in his "Squeezing the Gambits" book, and while his analysis has some flaws, his evaluation is correct: White has a positional advantage.
The main concern was the "rook lift" variation, with ...a5, ...Ra6/g6 (or h6), which was supposed to give Black attacking chances. However, this plan does NOT work, and Kiril has dealt with it in a very good way.
So... yes, I was referring to what you envisioned- but white's advantage if Black does not go for the rook lift is not "tiny"- it's real, and quite strong.
The only openings I really memorize are against dubious openings mostly so I know of 4.a3! against the Fajarowictz, the Tal Gambit against the Grand Prix Attack (What's the big appeal behind completely conceding d4 to black anyway? Not even Greco and Labourdonnais took the hints back in the day), the Englund Gambit by heart (and against ...f6 lines I go with e4! transposing into a game with a king pawn feel after ...fxe5 where I as white have a big advantage and keep black from castling with the simple Bc4 for some time), Bd3 and c3 against 1...b6 (I actually have club experience with this as white and won convincingly by sacrificing the exchange queen for rook into a trivial pawn endgame if anyone's interested), ...h5 against the Grob after 1...e5 because I am always determined to put that knight on f6 even at the cost of a pawn end of story, etc.
Englund - Busted
Booty with 3...Ne4 - Busted (4.a3!)
Booty with 3...Ng4 - Highly Dubious, but luckily enough, I don't allow it!
Englund - Busted....(Extraordinary!)....Although there are much better tries for Black, I think that anyone who claims that the Englund is busted has not read either "Englund Gambit" by Stefan Bucker or any of the articles from Kiassber on Lev's rediscovery of 3...Nge7
Fajarowicz - Busted (4.a3!)....(Astounding!)....Mind you, there is sufficient practical evidence surrounding the continuance 4.a3 b6 that the Faj has not dead just yet
Budapest - High dubious....(Brilliant!).....Then again there are older books by Bogdan Lalic, Tseitlin, Glaskov and even Borik which successfully dispute this too (and I am sure the new books would as well)
So me thinks:
People who think that such openinhs have been busted and or are dubious are, in one word.......(Priceless)
Wasn't e3 and Nh3 the "refutation"? The Adler is just +=
Nevermind. <question deleted>
People who think that such openings have been busted and or are dubious are, in one word.......(Priceless)
If you play these gambits differently you simply lose in a different way. @Roeczak The Nh3 stuff is strange. No doubt that it's a strong continuation but I personally wouldn't complicate the game like that. @pfrenThat line gives white very, very little. And unless you play the Budapest all the time black will certainly know those lines much better than you. Also, black has many ways of playing it where in my line almost all the moves are near-forced. The rook lift is strong and solves basically all of black's piece problems. You can get a game that way but I think you need to look past the bad pawns in my varation. It looks like black has counterplay but he doesn't. Black either stays passive or allows white to trade down to an endgame where black is clearly worse.
I am starting to play the flexible move 1. e6! After 2.c4 I can play Indian 2.Nf6, The Dutch 2.f5, the e6-c5 opening with 2.c5, or Queens gambit with d5. But after 2.e4 I don't play the french, I play 2.c5!