Danish Gambit?? for black

I tried Danish gambit like play from black side didn't turn out to be good in the begining. One vital mistake from white saved me. Enjoy!! and please comment. 

I'm speechless

Wow!  So those smothered mates from the TT actually do happen !  Who knew?

Playing the Danish as Black is a definitely lost position in my opinion. I would consider playing it in 1|0 or 2|1 games but nothing longer.

My reasoning is that when White plays the Danish, to develop his attack he gives up two pawns. As compensation he has two bishops on adjacent diagonals aiming down at the enemy's kingside. He also has a pawn on e4, controlling the center.

When Black tries it, White can have a knight or bishop developed due to the extra move. This gives him a chance to fight against the strong attack and seeing as he is up two pawns, it would make sense for Black to lose.

The Danish gambit is not played very often at master level due to the fact that with best play it becomes a drawn game very early. If the opponent has an extra move, it should then lead to a loss.

However, the Danish is a good opening to learn, if only to see how dangerous a bishop pair can be. I used to play the Danish gambit but stopped after realising how weak it made my queenside.

I would love to see OP's game analyzed by Dzindzi.

This is why I stopped playing the Danish as white:

I know I probably missed something, but that is how I see it. If you play the 'Reverse Danish' then there is no advantage in development to start with.

I've tried this variation  once as Black.  Discovered attack against his Queen helped me win.

That is, in fact, not the danish. It is known as the half-danish and is a sort of halfway-point, losing only one pawn while still speeding up development. I don't think it is as forcing though.

The Danish Gambit is not unplayable, it is just not a winning line for White. I have read that it leads to an early draw with best play from both sides, however I no longer play it because piece trades are potentially fatal for White.

That is why my first comment on the thread was saying that trying to play it as Black woule be too dangerous. It is not unsound, however, it is unorthodox.

It seems that you misunderstand me. What I meant is that the Danish decreases White's winning chances, but not to the point where it gives Black an advantage. It is a good way to beat an inexperienced player because they don't know how to defend against the powerful bishops.

Sometimes you can play a two pawn sac gambit in the opening in a tournament game against a former United States Champion and do ok.

Here is a line I once used--it is not a Danish Gambit but close--it is Goring Gambit two pawn sacrifice...

If you play to give your grandmaster opponent a lot of problems--he might not be able to solve them all....Taylor rule #122

RS in the game you gave the move 9. Bb2 has to be a bad move...

Not nothing. You can't deny that he has rapid development. I never said it was a winning opening. In my opinion, it makes black better as White needs to attack quickly to regain his lost material. I don't believe he has enough compensation but I know that he still has a lot of play from the position. Black has to be careul. Don't get me wrong, I respect your opening knowledge; I just disagree that it screws White over. Black can screw White over if he has the skill; i never denied it.

Relax, I'm not pretending I know everything. I just know the basics that White does have compensation for the two lost pawns, just not enough compensation for a won position.

And what lines are you suggesting sorry? I don't know what you are talking about. Could you please post them? (again if they were already posted)

Thanks for all the comments. Yes the game got ridiculous after 10th move. But hey we were blitzing so didn't have much time. 

This line is a theoretical win for White. Black does not have enough compensation for the two lost pawns.

I agree with ponz111, as said earlier. The point of the Danish is to have an advanatage in development. If your opponent gets an extra move in, there is no compensation for the two lost pawns.

I only put the bishop there to keep the idea of the danish - bishops on c4 and b2. It wasn't very well thoought out, but I thought the c-pawn could be moved for a discovery.

If the bishop moves along the other diagonal to e3, f4 or g5, the c-pawn is left weak and undefended. Again, proving white to have no real advantage.

RS You need lessons from a player higher than yourself. You do not understand the value to getting your pieces out immediately in a gambit.

You also do not seem to understand that a gambit that might be playable as White will not be playable as Black as you have lost a move in developing your pieces and that makes all the difference in the world.