French Defense Nimzowitsch Gambit

Sort:
KamikazeJohnson
Touched on this topic in the Favourite Gambit thread; thought it deserved a thread all to itself rather than derail the other.
I've been fascinated with this response to the French Defense since I saw it in a feature game in my first ever Chess book (An Invitation to Chess by Chernev and Harkness).  Saw the same game with more in-depth analysis in My System.  First moves shown below:

It's always bothered me that this doesn't seem to be an accepted line, or even one that's seen any analysis; I've several books that discuss the French Defense, but none of them ever seem to mention 4...Qg4.

Here's my thoughts:

  1.  Calling it a "Gambit" is a misnomer; white can recover the Gambit pawn pretty much at will
  2. White puts tremendous pressure on Black's King side with e5, Qg4, and Nf3.  Black's blocked BIshop and restricted King-side development mean the Queen is relatively safe from attack.
  3. White can blockade the d4 and d5 pawns by posting both Bishops on the d-file, which closes the diagonals for Black's Bishops
  4. White can easily support e5 with pieces; the only way for Black to dislodge the e-Pawn is with ...f6
  5. With the advanced c-Pawn, 0-0-0 is risky for Black in general, and White can use both Rooks, both Bishops, and a Knight to build a Q-side attack if black does castle that way.

Unfortunately, I don't encounter the French Defense often enough to really explore this line, and as I said, I've been unable to find any solid analysis to refute it.

Anyone have specific thoughts on this line?

Strangemover

I'm not convince about this for white. f5 now for black sort of shuts it down because exf6 en passent looks unwise. So the queen is going to g3 probably, then black has a bit of time to get the cxd4 Nc6 in...It's not terrible by any stretch but I would still prefer to take my chances with 4.c3. 

MTL_Made

its weird, because nimzowitsch himself says it isnt an agressive gambit

MTL_Made

i didnt mean to enter that last one without further elaboration. His idea was remarkably positional, which is reflected in his games. he didnt play h4 h5 to attack, he did it to keep the g6 square barren of knights. he really just over defended e5 the whole game...and it worked

Chr0mePl8edSt0vePipe
Orthosnapp gambit is better 👊
KamikazeJohnson

I counter Orthoschnapp with...something besides 2...d4 lol

RivertonKnight

So what exactly is wrong with Black's position?

KamikazeJohnson
RivertonKnight wrote:

So what exactly is wrong with Black's position?

Without doing an in-depth tactical analysis, I'd say Black's Queen is a bit weak, and White's Knight is better, but Black has a much better Center and can trade the Knights off at any time.  I'd say Black probably stands better.

My opinion: 6. c3 is a mistake by White, as it allows Black to clear out the d4 and e5 Pawns.

KamikazeJohnson

So this is a fairly typical position that I would expect to see arise from 4...Qg4.  Of course there are other variants, fir example if Black plays f6 or f5 at some point.

White doesn't really care about the Gambit pawn, as the d3 Bishop solidly blockades Black's doubled d-pawns.  Further, the Black pawn on d4 blocks Black's Queen and dark-square Bishop from threatening White's future Castled position along the diagonal.  White can open the c-file with c3 whenever it's desirable to do so.  The e5 pawn can still be defended with Qg3 and Re1 (after 0-0) as needed.

Black's King-side pieces will be difficult to develop.

My areas of concern for White are mainly how to deal with an f6 advance by Black, which guarantees removal of the e5 pawn, but may result in dangerous weakening of Black's King-side.  In the game where I learned of this opening, Black plays f5, but Nimzowitsch doesn't bite with the en-passant capture, and Black suffers badly for having no way of removing the e5 pawn.

morphy1023

It is the Nimzowitch Gambit, so it is positional, sacrificing a pawn for a positional advantage, not an immediate attack.

Woluntee
Strangemover kirjoitti:

I'm not convince about this for white. f5 now for black sort of shuts it down because exf6 en passent looks unwise. So the queen is going to g3 probably, then black has a bit of time to get the cxd4 Nc6 in...It's not terrible by any stretch but I would still prefer to take my chances with 4.c3. 

if f5, Qg3, cxd4, white can probably win the pawn back with moves like Ne2 with the plan on directing his knight to b3, Its a completely fine position for white and can actually create some pretty intense positions for both sides

tygxc

4...cxd4 4 Nf3 Nc6 5 Bd3 h5 is more testing, should be good for black.

Woluntee
Strangemover kirjoitti:

I'm not convince about this for white. f5 now for black sort of shuts it down because exf6 en passent looks unwise. So the queen is going to g3 probably, then black has a bit of time to get the cxd4 Nc6 in...It's not terrible by any stretch but I would still prefer to take my chances with 4.c3. 

Oh btw f5 doesnt really shut down white since the e6 pawn is a huge weakness, also to count that after Qg3, white has some plans of either regaining the pawn, sliding his queen to h2 and creating a kingside attack with g4

Woluntee
tygxc kirjoitti:

4...cxd4 4 Nf3 Nc6 5 Bd3 h5 is more testing, should be good for black.

True, after 6. Qf4 g6 5 O-O Bg7 6 Re1...
Black has a good position in general, but white also has some pretty good counterplay if you look at the position a bit more. Black has great central control, while white has to patiently wait for his time to capture the pawn and possibly lay his knight there from my interpretation

darkunorthodox88

Interesting in the abstract but simply fails