The budabest gambit is actually playable without getting worse but the albin countergambit just gives white an advantage if he knows theory. But the albin still works goo against many players.
Albin Countergambit vs. Budapest Gambit. Which is better?
Sort:
Mar 2, 2015
0
#3
If you're playing blitz or bullet chess, it doesn't matter much. They both are sharp and can confuse an unprepared opponent.
If you're playing against masters in standard time controls, The Budapest is playable, but passive. The Albin is close to busted. The Albin gives up a central pawn for free. Alexander Morozevich was able to breathe some life into the Albin, but White has several paths to a clear advantage and Moro has stopped playing it except in blitz. If White is well prepared, he will score much better against the Albin than the Budapest.
White can avoid them both with 2 Nf3 , then black has to have something else ready .
Both of these gambits give white a pleasant edge, but it seems to me that black has an easier time forcing a dynamic position in the Albin than in the Budapest.
What do you think is a better reply to White's d4 opening among the following: Albin Countergambit or Budapest Gambit?
OR
Which one is easier to master and to play and which one is more effective in blitz games and standard games?