I don't really like unsound gambits like the Latvian, Morra, BDG, or Wing- (The KG isn't part of this list for me, it goes in my list of respectable gambits)
If it counts, I do like the Semi-Slav: Marshall Gambit (1. d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3. Nc3 e6 4. e4) as well as the Semi-Slav: Anti-Moscow Gambit which can get pretty crazy and I have trouble understanding quite a few moves but the main idea like any other gambit is to just put pressure on Black's King.
Heres 2 sample lines of the Anti-Moscow Gambit:
There's this way of handling the petroff that completely denies black a safe game.
Theory has no idea what to think of it.
Edit: Sorry I didn't mean to put it in as a diagram.
Anyway, the sequence is 1. e4 e5 2. nf3 nf6 3. nxe5 d6 4. Nxf7 Kxf7
The Gibbins-Weidenhagen Gambit is quite clever. White has two center pawns and Black will have nothing but a knight that is pretty much forced to retreat back to Nf6, because of the threat, QxNg4. I like it. Thank you. 
I use King's Gambit routinely in blitz, but will switch to the Goring Gambit in CC and long play. Based on my limited chess travels, it seems to me the Goring gives White better chances than the Scotch.
The Scotch is fine but it can transpose into Two Knights Defense so you need to know what to do there as well.
The Gibbins-Weidenhagen Gambit is quite clever. White has two center pawns and Black will have nothing but a knight that is pretty much forced to retreat back to Nf6, because of the threat, QxNg4. I like it. Thank you.
No, not forced to retreat. Black plays d6 (defending the N and preparing e5) and White simply does not have compensation for the lost pawn and ruined kingside pawn structure. Apparently the almost-World-Champ David Bronstein occassionally played that g4 move -- which is just to say if you're a tactical genius I suppose you can whip up something out any sort of complication and imbalance, but to an ordinary/sub-ordinary player like myself, jeezis that g4 gambit looks like a dreadful way to begin a chess game.
*edit -- I can't find any evidence of 1.d4 Nf6 2.g4 ever being played by Bronstein... despite the Game Explorer calling it the Bronstein gambit.
edit 2 -- Well, FYI I've been looking at this gambit with an engine, and *sigh* it's not as bad as I thought... which doesn't make it good...
i love the goring gambit and scotch gambit OTB.
i'll also play the tartakower variation of the sicilian which gambits a pawn in a similar fashion to the goring (1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. c3).
sometimes i'll try to pull off the smith morra gambit deferred as well (1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. c3).
and i know it's not a gambit, but i also enjoy playing the scandinavian OTB. you'd be surprised at how many people don't capture with 2. exd5 and instead play 2. e5, and that can lead to some fun lines as black.
Quenn gambit accepted it's my favorite
but people rarely accept it
@ AnthonyCG - C24 Bishop's Opening - Urusov Gambit looks great. Thank you! This opening starts out as C24 Bishop's Opening - Ponziani Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.d4). Two possibilities to explore. 
White dominates the board in this game.
@ JG27Pyth - My Mistake. After 1.d4 Nf6 2.g4 Nxg4 3.e4, 3...d6 is the correct response.
Fascinating how this gambit goes by many names and yet in the ChessBase database (4.5 million games), Bronstein's name does not appear in this opening with 967 games found after 1.d4 Nf6 2.g4.
Hustling speed players like to call this outrage the Poisoned Spike Gambit, whereas the ECO pedantically dubs it “A45 Queen’s Pawn: Bronstein Gambit”. But I like Bogey’s name for it best: The Maltese Falcon Attack.
It's also known as the Gibbins-Wiedenhagen Gambit.
i love the goring gambit and scotch gambit OTB.
i'll also play the tartakower variation of the sicilian which gambits a pawn in a similar fashion to the goring (1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. c3).
sometimes i'll try to pull off the smith morra gambit deferred as well (1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. d4 cxd4 4. c3).
and i know it's not a gambit, but i also enjoy playing the scandinavian OTB. you'd be surprised at how many people don't capture with 2. exd5 and instead play 2. e5, and that can lead to some fun lines as black.
Excellent gambits. The Goring and Danish look real good right now for my blitz play.
Interesting. I've seen a very strong player use the Smith-Morra Gambit several times with great success against the Sicilian. I need to commit The Tartakower Variation (c3!) to memory. Why let Black have all of the fun with comfortable and familiar lines?
Here's a Scandinavian game with 2.e5 played by two 2400+ players. Black has a strong center after 1.e4 d5 2.e5 c5.
@#12 Wow, that's an amazing game -- the final mate is lovely... 21...Qg6 22.Rxg8+ Qxg8 23.Qxf6+ Qg7 24.Qxg7#
To me, it is the Gibbins-Wiedenhagen Gambit. They are the players who played and analyzed and promoted it while others laughed, so they deserve the credit, whether or not it is good in the final appraisal.
If Black navigates through the first few moves, which isn't so difficult, the key for White is patience. Increase the pressure where you can, use the slight imbalances created and the open g-file and don't assume you have to mount an early attack. Let Black commit himself, and plan accordingly.
I don't understand the appeal of an opening that from move 2 has White playing for the opportunity to scratch back to equality (so long as Black isn't up on the best lines).
I simply said it was unsound in my opinion. Theres no way gambits can be considered 'solid.' When I think of solid, I think of soundness (solidity implies soundness, but not necessarily the other way around) and not-risky-and risk is what pretty much defines a gambit, therefore it can't be sound nor solid.
+Theres no way an opening in which Black scores 45% after 3...dxc3 can be considered sound imo and much less solid.
Sure, you might like the positions you get from it which is perfectly fine but in terms of 'raw' soundness, the SMG is unsound and definately not solid.
|
|
To me, it is the Gibbins-Wiedenhagen Gambit. They are the players who played and analyzed and promoted it while others laughed, so they deserve the credit, whether or not it is good in the final appraisal.
If Black navigates through the first few moves, which isn't so difficult, the key for White is patience. Increase the pressure where you can, use the slight imbalances created and the open g-file and don't assume you have to mount an early attack. Let Black commit himself, and plan accordingly.
I don't understand the appeal of an opening that from move 2 has White playing for the opportunity to scratch back to equality (so long as Black isn't up on the best lines).
I'm guessing, then, that it is not for you. Now, I freely admit that a well-prepared Black has nothing to fear from the Gibbins-Weidenhagen.
How many players do you know who are well prepared against it? I've tipped you, and you have looked at it, so you have a head's-up and should be thanking me. Most people have never seen it before, and there are many ways to go wrong.
It isn't possible to rely on most engines to evaluate gambits. By their nature, engines will tend to rate those lines where you get back the pawn higher, even if they aren't the best in the long run. The key gambit moves are evaluated lower because they don't immediately restore the balance or force mate.
I've played it OTB against a player rated 2360 who later was over 2400, and obtained a winning position which I managed to spoil with several errors before time control. Needless to say, he didn't play the best defense because it was totally unexpected. Most of the people I play aren't nearly as good as him (that's USCF rating, not Chess.com).
I must agree with Estragon here.
In a local club Championship I played this against an Ex South-African Champion, and also managed to mess up a winning position. But reaching a good position against a player many levels above me is a victory in itself.
The only reason I don't play it more often is I hardly ever start 1d4
There just isn't that much time for thinking during blitz, and when someone offers up a gambit pawn, which of the many gambits has thrown your opponent the biggest curve ball, made them scratch their heads the most while burning precious time on the clock?
At my blitz rating, I have had good luck with the Scotch Gambit for White. My opponents usually pause to think after I don't recapture Black's pawn but instead develop my bishop. The Scotch Game would be 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 - and you have material equality, not a gambit.
I am learning both the Danish and Goring gambit right now. They look quite promising for blitz play, and long play.