yep
Does the Knight sacrifice refute the Damiano defence?
Sort:
After 3. Nxe5 black will play Qe7. Refutes? Well, it's still a game, but I won't disagree if you think it is.
Apr 16, 2017
0
#4
The best reply on Damiano gambit is the countergambit 3...Ne7 (3...Qe7 is okay too). 
It's not proven that the Damiano gambit 3. Nxe5 refutes the Damiano defense 2...f6. We discussed it recently here
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/damiano-gambit-chigorin-gambit-vs-3-ne7
Apr 16, 2017
0
#5
Only a complete beginner/novice would play 3...fxe5.
Under the 2200 level, I'd say there's no such thing as a refutation for the vast majority of openings, this included.
Apr 16, 2017
0
#6
3. Bc4 might even be better.
But fun fact: the position from the OP occurred in my first tournament game ever, when I was in middle school and sub-1000. I was white and knew that Nxe5 worked, even then
Apr 16, 2017
0
#7
micky1943 wrote:
2...f6 is a pretty bad move, but it's not clear to me that 3.Nxe5 is White's best choice. Obviously Black can't play 3...fxe5, but after 3...Qe7, Black isn't dead yet (on life support, maybe) As far as I can see, 3.Bc4 looks very good too.
Yes, 3. Bc4, 3. Nxe5, 3. Nc3 and 3. d4 are all good for white. 
Greco decided this defence was bad for Black in 1620. Did he decide wrong? If it's not refuted, what should black play to have a chance of winning?
This seems very good for White. He has developed two minor pieces and is ready for castling. Black has developed no minor pieces, and his Q is open to attack.
micky1943 wrote:
So, relatively best for Black in this line is 4....d5 instead of 4...Qxe4+. Chigorin played this once, so at least you have some good company.
Not me, I'm only playing this as White . The database stats look very good for white whatever 4...d5 or 4...Qe4+. No wins for Black. Chigorin played this once, but only drew, in my database
Fascinating game! Look at White's Knight sacrifice followed by Queen pin. Shouldn't White have won after that?
Apr 17, 2017
0
#10
Who cares if it's a refutation? Black is clearly worse whether he takes the knight or not.
how morons would blunder checkmate with damiano defence
fxe5 is almost not terrible if black knows what he is doing. He will be down a bunch of pawns, but it is still kind of messy
Ramsey theory - I don't get 7. Bxd5+. 365 database doesn't show people playing this. Can't black take back with his bishop?
And shouldn't white be concentrating on forcing K to the edge of the board for (hopefully) an early checkmate... can he mess around taking pawns? And why would black play 6... d5? My databse *does* show this. I guess it opens up files for Black, but I doubt players at my level, 1400, would attempt this as it just seems like gifting a pawn.
Also, is 8...h6 correct? shouldn't it be h7 to stop the pawn check. Or are you figuring the ...Kh7 might have mileage?
Aug 20, 2018
0
#14
its not busted, but its as refuted a bad defense that doesnt get mated can be.
Aug 20, 2018
0
#15
Well said, @darkunorthodox88. Fischer famously couldn't beat the Damiano in two different simuls, but nobody bothered to try it against him in a GM game.
Klauer's right, it's a great way to teach novices how to attack the f7 weakness and to learn the relative value of active vs passive pieces. Novices often have a very difficult time sacrificing their pieces, even if it leads to an overwhelming advantage.
Aug 20, 2018
0
#16
RamseyTheory wrote:
fxe5 is almost not terrible if black knows what he is doing. He will be down a bunch of pawns, but it is still kind of messy
That position is... not even a tiny bit messy.
Messy for black, sure. He's all over the place.
RamseyTheory έγραψε:
fxe5 is almost not terrible if black knows what he is doing. He will be down a bunch of pawns, but it is still kind of messy
Very messy, indeed: Black is just four pawns down, but his king is very active, and may eventually eat all the missing pawns by himself. Heck, white may even play 12.d3 and lose.
Jul 8, 2025
0
#19
Cherub_Enjel wrote:
Only a complete beginner/novice would play 3...fxe5.
Under the 2200 level, I'd say there's no such thing as a refutation for the vast majority of openings, this included.
this is so naive...
I quite often get the Damiano Defence played against me, and I usually get a happy result from the following Knight sacrifice:
Does this Knight sacrifice refute the Damiano defence?