Englund Gambit Complex

Hello everyone, I wanted to discuss the Englund Gambit Complex. It begins where white plays d4, and black counters with the gambit e5. If white takes the pawn, then black will usually end up with: better positioning, a free rook, or a quick checkmate. However, if white does NOT capture the "free" pawn, then black is in a horrible position and is under extreme attack. I have had this gambit work out perfectly for me, and also fail miserably. When is the best time to use it, or should I use it at all?

The Englund is a free pawn.

Black can only dream about compensation. You get in return-what? No better development, no weaknesses, no attack against the white king... nothing. At best you hope to get the pawn back without falling in a lost position, which is hardly an achievement.

You can find worse openings to play as Black, but this is certainly no easy task.

Thanks guys. Could you show me an example where white makes it work?

Also, what is the best response to d4? e6?

Technically this is game over, and this is far from being the only continuation which gives white a huge advantage.

4.Bg5 Qb4+ is about the same as 4.Bf4 Qb4+, it just forces Black's hand.

Thanks!

Not just a free pawn, but a central pawn at that. 

You are probably recalling that since the From Gambit is sound 3...d6 in the Englund must be too.  However, there's a very important difference between the two: Against 1.f4 black has a kingside weakness to leverage against white whereas 1.d4 achieves the same things as 1.f4 while also being a developing move and having support of the queen (and not weakening the king)

1.f4,e5!? 2.fxe5,d6 3.exd6,Bxd6 is compensation, black sacrificed both central pawns and white could develop a pawn center and black has two central open files to pressure these pawns if white advances them. 

1.d4,e5? 2.dxe5,d6 3.exd6,Bxd6 and 4.e4 can be played immediately since there's no check by ...Qh4+

2.e4! or if you really don't want to enter the French 2.Nf3 or 2.c4 are fine.  If you can grab the center do it!  Just be aware of the different plans for both sides.  Your d4 pawn will be the nexus of operations for some time (black will play ...c5 maybe cxd4 and ...Qb6 and ...Nc6 piling on the pressure)  Black will surrender the center in some lines (1.e4,e6 2.d4,d5 3.Nc3,dxe4 4.Nxe4) The idea is to restrain and blockade d4.  Or black can goad you into playing dxc5 if keeping the tension, drive back your blockaders, and mobilize his pawn center. 

White of course has resources too, such as overprotecting d4 so his pieces can go elsewhere, though taking advantage of the bad lightsquared bishop is tough.  Black can try ...b6 lines, but that's even worse than the mainlines and causes more problems than it tries solving. 

And what after 12...fe6? - I see nothing.

Simply 12.f4 Qxa2 13.e3 Qa1+ 14.Kf2 and Black is dead.

The Zilbermintz-Stadleman variation 3...Nge7 is much better

If you substitute "much better" with "less rubbish" i might agree, under some circumstances.

13...Ne7- it seems you forgot that queen on a3. You cannot even take on g7 due to the mate on c1.

Why not just play the Budapest?  Most people play 2.c4 anyway and if 2.Nf3 then 2...e6 or 2...g6 and continue development then chip away at d4.  

Oh good lord. You are going remonstrate using semantics? The one thing I find so frustrating with players with titles and or decent ratings is that they fail to comphrend that some of the chess public actually do hang on their every word and accept it as gospel. Whether it is right or wrong is a moot point but good (titled) players should accept some responsiblity for this (misplaced?) adulation and support their own comments with something other than dogmatic utterances.

1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5!? is the Albin Countergambit and this can be viewed as another instance of Black playing a "waiting move" to allow White to weaken his center with c2-c4 before opening up the position with e7-e5.  Black's play is very different in this defense, though.  And like the Budapest, it can be avoided with 2.Nf3, although this deprives White of the opportunity to play QGD positions where the KN goes to e2 that a lot of White players like.

However in this case it is right so I do not see you point. The Englund gambit is bad in basicly every variation because black does not have anywhere near enough compensation for the pawn. 

Sure you win games with this opening or rather despite the opening. At low ratings chess is decided by tactics. But that does not make the opening any better. 

I am not going to say are right or wrong. I will ask you this: Have you read Englund Gambit by Stefan Bucker? Have you had a chance to look at any of the Nge7 Englund gambit articles in Kaissiber? If you answered no, just what are you basing your assessment on? Dogmatic waffle in General opening tomes like ECO, BCO and MCO?....You are do exactly as IM Pfren, making generalised sweeping statements without a shred of offered evidence...

The next setp is probably someone stumping up with some computer driven analysis...

Oh the joys of the modern compter age. I bet you free thinkers like Alapin, Tartakower, Alekhine & the rest are probably spinning in their graves...

Sorry to bring you the news but the opening in chess is dogmatic. It is all about getting your pieces out as efficient as possible. 

There is just no way you can argue that Ne7 -> Ng6 -> Ne5 is a effective system of development (although as pfren said it is better then exposing you queen early). If white just normally responds with development moves like 4. Nc3 there is just no way to deny white won a development tempo for nothing. There is no weakness or anything bad for white. He has harmonious lead in developmend

I know it is useless to discuss with the fans of bad openings like the 1. f3 and such but just think logically. An opening where you deliberatly lose tempi for nothing cannot be good.