I came up with a new option in the Duras gambit. With such a game, positions atypical for this gambit are obtained and, in principle, interesting positions (White's attacking advantage is easily neutralized in the endgame)
Fred Defense(1.e4 f5)
Sort:
Artur460 wrote:
I don't think this position is dangerous for the king. If that's what you meant, of course. In this position, White loses a lot of pace, and they already need to defend.
Wait...what?
The point of 4.g4?? Is what? Defending a pawn that is not being attacked? Play 4.Nf3 to intend Nh4. Then what? If 4...d5 then 5.Nh4. If 4...h4 then 5.d4 d5 6.Bd3.
The ball is in Whites court in that he is the one with the initiative.
Gluonsghost написал:
Artur460 написал:
Я не думаю, что это положение опасно для короля. Если вы это имели в виду, конечно. В этой позиции белые сильно теряют темп, и им уже нужно обороняться.
Подожди...что?
В чем смысл 4.g4?? Это что? Защищать пешку, на которую не нападают? Играйте 4.Nf3, чтобы использовать Nh4. Тогда что? Если 4...d5, то 5.Nh4. Если 4...h4, то 5.d4 d5 6.Bd3.
Мяч находится на площадке белых в том смысле, что инициатива принадлежит ему.
The point of the g4 move is to strengthen the pawn in front of the knight and continue the pressure on h5. The idea of a horse on h4 is not bad, although it has a refutation, which I will show in the diagram below. Although at the same time White keeps the pawn on f5, they attack strongly and they don't form a good position. The knight is on the edge of the board, the queen is closed. And if Black plays correctly, Black will outgrow White's defense.
Here is a refutation of such a move by a knight
Sack_o_Potatoes написал:
That's duras gambit
Yes
Preusseagro написал:
Artur460 hat geschrieben:
I came up with a new option in the Duras gambit. With such a game, positions atypical for this gambit are obtained and, in principle, interesting positions (White's attacking advantage is easily neutralized in the endgame)
I can asure you a beat every player with the same strange with the with the white pieces
little_guinea_pig написал:
Честно говоря, я не вижу смысла в гамбите Дюраса. Если белые просто играют позиционно после 2.exf5 Nf6, а не идут за королем, черные кажутся совершенно потерянными: 3.d4 d5 4.d3, и у черных нет возможности вернуть свою пешку, оба слона заблокированы, и попытка вытащить их с помощью e6 просто тратит больше времени: 4...e6 5.Nf3! Отдача пешки для превосходного развития является общей темой в этих типах дебютов exf5 6. 0-0 Be7 7.c4, когда ясно видно, что белые просто намного лучше (движок дает +2,5).
Nov 25, 2021
0
#29
I played it on ICC back in 2004. It is a nice Troll Gambit. On 3.Be2 you play Rg8 of course...
Artur460 wrote:
here, for example, is a position similar to the king's gambit
The position is after 1 e4 f5 2 exf5 Nf6 3 g4 h5 4 g5 Ne4.
If I could be sure that 3 g4 would be met by 3 ... h5 I would always play 3 g4 and then after the fourth move above I'd continue with 5 d3 (kicking the knight) and 6 Be2 (winning the pawn on h5 - possibly after Black playing g6 and White play fxg6) with a ferocious attack against the tatters of Black's king-side.
Of course, if Black doesn't play h5 then Black still has to meet the threat of g5 and Qh5 and it looks like it still requires king-side pawn move.
Hi! I understand that in most combinations of the king's gambit, a move of the king's pawn is necessary. I'm just saying that option 1. e4, f5 2. exf5, Nf6 3. g4, schemes like the royal gambit appear, and that the theory from KG can also be used here.
jetoba написал:
jetoba написал:
Artur460 wrote:
here, for example, is a position similar to the king's gambit
The position is after 1 e4 f5 2 exf5 Nf6 3 g4 h5 4 g5 Ne4.
If I could be sure that 3 g4 would be met by 3 ... h5 I would always play 3 g4 and then after the fourth move above I'd continue with 5 d3 (kicking the knight) and 6 Be2 (winning the pawn on h5 - possibly after Black playing g6 and White play fxg6) with a ferocious attack against the tatters of Black's king-side.
Of course, if Black doesn't play h5 then Black still has to meet the threat of g5 and Qh5 and it looks like it still requires king-side pawn move.
I'm having a hard time understanding why White would play 2.e5 when 2.exf5 gives him a near-decisive advantage on move 2.
Nov 25, 2021
0
#33
jetoba hat geschrieben:
Of course, if Black doesn't play h5 then Black still has to meet the threat of g5 and Qh5 and it looks like it still requires king-side pawn move.
There is the piece sacrifice 3...d5 4.g5 Bxf5 5.gxf6 exf6 intending Qd7, Nc6, 0-0-0 and then maybe g5,h5. I played it quite often but only one pawn for the piece is certainly not enough.
3...h6 and then 4...e6 5.fxe6 d5 might be blacks best chance.
Nov 30, 2021
0
#34
Its pure nonsense. take the pawn, play d4 and bd3. white can choose between nf3-nh4, or ne2-ng3 to hold unto the pawn if need be. (in some lines, early qf3 is also possible).
black simply cant play it like a king's gambit because he is too slow to threaten a central pawn majority
I've heard "The Fred" used for various (poor) openings. It might be a reference to Fred Flintstone or just figuring that Fred sounds like a name for an average Joe who wasn't particularly knowledgeable (at least for people that never heard of Fred Reinfeld).
The first "Fred" I heard of involved Black playing f6 and Kf7.
In this diagram, I have presented all the variants of the Duras gambit and their advantages. Except for the option with the F7 move, because I think it's funny and wrong
Toad1258 wrote:
you should 5ake on f5. the king will be weak and you will be threatening to check with the queen. your pawn will take after they block.
if you play white squared bishop e2 and let the queen be taken it will be mate by playing bxh5
