I'm motivated to post the following game for a number of reasons:

1. It's a miniature in a rarely seen gambit.

2. According to the site analysis tool (approx 2500) I only made one inaccurate move (some sort of record for me) and I'm feeling rather chuffed. Okay, my opponent plays a couple of "howlers" but I played what was put in front of me.

3. The opponent (a gentleman of over 30 years my personal acquaintance and a good friend) never even said "good game" after such a thorough stuffing. Sure, there was a little trash talking (all me, actually) but c'mon, not even a "gg"?

Very interesting... I will have to check that one out. Thanks!

Amusing developments after I sent the link to "Grumpy":

1. He telephones to bid me "Good game".

2. He explains how he was reading through the game I sent him (thinking that many of Black's moves were what he would play) when in the last few moves he starts to realise that it's his own game.

3. He has told me "I don't mind you taking the p*** but don't call me Grumpy... even if I am!"

So all is right and rosy.

hehe.  cool.

Here's one I played yesterday on LiveChess:

Thanks for the link, bookmarked for further consideration.

I played the Rosentreter Gambit against a 13 year old  (approx 2150) member of the England youth squad in a rapid play tournament (15 mins each) a couple of months back. He knew a good defence and handed me my head on a plate in about 25 moves. I asked him afterwards how come he knew what was going on in such a forgotten antique. He said that he's played against it on the internet... damn you internet!

Very strong.  Why is this variation so rare?

Quite simply, because it's not quite sound. Players generally don't have the balls these days to play such old-fashioned chess.

It can all go wrong for White if he doesn't keep pushing. This time I play Black and soon steal the initiative. The following annotations are a mixture of my synthetic style and the site analysis tool:

Got to have my daily fix of this risky gambit. My opponent plays a good game, forcing me to gambit two pieces to maintain an initiative. Analysis/annotation thanks to the site tool. 7 minutes each, no increment:

Inaccuracies: 5 = 15.2% of moves
Mistakes: 2 = 6.1% of moves
Blunders: 4 = 12.1% of moves

How much fun was that?

prawny, this line is one i've tried a bit with the King's Gambit.  i like it but it has to be flawed at the higher levels yeah?

These openings do get played occasionally by the big boys:

So, one each at the highest level, make your own mind up.

i vote yes for white.  especially at my level.  i'd love to get this line in on thursday at my club in a G90...  just the King's Gambit alone would make me happy but this would be great.

János Flesch

I'm looking for an image of the German Lieutenant-Colonel Adolf Rosentreter (1844-1920). Anyone have one that they could post here?

check out the muzio gambit, its similair and i always play it when opponent does g5 g4

Seems to me in the game where the GM lost as black he was doing fine and simply pressed too hard for the win in the endgame.

Yeah, Black looked okay. Maybe his opponent's well-known penchant for risky play and the nature of the game in hand all conspired against him. After all, White gives his more highly rated opponent a piece in the opening, surely he has to win.

PrawnEatsPrawn, Absolutely! The psychology of the sac could have very well been the reason for black losing the thread of the game.

so i played in an OTB tournament last name--game30.  i scalped an 1800 player--my rating in around 1100--provisional.  anyway, used this gambit (thanks for posting this thread prawny--would never have used this line otherwise), had a lot of fun.  and won both games i used it.  here's the first: