In the line with 4.Nf3, White specifically is returning the pawn for major positional trumps. If you want to hold on to the pawn, you have to play 4.Bf4, but then tactics loom and this is what Black is hoping for.
4.Nf3 is actually stronger, but it does return the pawn to Black.
In the line with 4.Nf3, White specifically is returning the pawn for major positional trumps. If you want to hold on to the pawn, you have to play 4.Bf4, but then tactics loom and this is what Black is hoping for.
4.Nf3 is actually stronger, but it does return the pawn to Black.
Actually 4.Bf4 is the most theoretically challenging move. This line shows why:
The main line of 4. Bf4 (ie 4... Nc6 5. Nf3 Bb4+ 6. Nbd2 Qe7 and then either 7. a3 or 7. e3) is what a 1. d4 player aims for; a very slight advantage with no great risk. There are a few sharp lines along the way (d6 gambits or 4... g5), but most of them are fairly dubious.
Okay thanks, I'll give 4.Bf4 a shot and see how I like it.
Any thoughts on this? I actually really like this line as black.
Any thoughts on this? I actually really like this line as black.
I don't think this line is considered to be good. White can hang on to the pawn easily by playing Nc3 and black will be forced to either have his development hindered by the e5 pawn or play either f6 or d6 and have no structural compensation for being a full pawn down.
I like the Budapest...as white.
Black just gets a boring position that is just begging for a draw. White can't really refute this gambit, but it looks like black is playing for two results.
I think people play it only because it looks cool to fake gambit a pawn and then getting it back.
In the line with 4.Nf3, White specifically is returning the pawn for major positional trumps. If you want to hold on to the pawn, you have to play 4.Bf4, but then tactics loom and this is what Black is hoping for.
4.Nf3 is actually stronger, but it does return the pawn to Black.
Actually 4.Bf4 is the most theoretically challenging move. This line shows why:
white should play 11. Bxc7. He should be 2 pawns up and winning the game.
10. ... 0-0 is an error 10. ... d6 is called for.
I prefer the Nd2 line, although Nc3 isn't bad as long Qd5 doesn't come along.
I like the Budapest...as white.
Black just gets a boring position that is just begging for a draw. White can't really refute this gambit, but it looks like black is playing for two results.
I think people play it only because it looks cool to fake gambit a pawn and then getting it back.
I don't believe this to be true at all. (Though the theme of the White d4 c4 player underestimating the Budapest is very common.) The positions that arise out of the Budapest are varied, depending on what White and Black choose. We have seen posted in this forum various videos and comments from different IMs and GMs on what they think is the single best way to handle the Budapest. I've noticed there's no consensus between them. What some masters say is the critical test others say gives Black equality.
No one plays the Budapest because it "looks cool". With the way the Budapest is denigrated and looked down apon, playing it is the equivalent of wearing a fanny pack. It's a practical, not fashionable choice. It's been one of my most successful openings. I've been playing it since I started chess, I enjoy it, there are no serious problems with it, I see no reason to stop playing it. Just like there would be no reason to stop wearing a fanny pack, the only reason could be caring about what other people think, which I don't. I'm a practical guy, you see. My d4 c4 repertoire is complete, and I'm spending my time studying other things while you're switching from the Nimzo-Indian to the Chigorin or whatever opening you're going to play next.
There are many different ideas in the Budapest against anything White can throw at it, many ideas to play for a win. You look at this opening from the perspective of an outsider visiting a foreign country. You don't know your way around or how to get anywhere within it, and this is why it looks that way to you. For someone who lives here and knows the geography it's different.
Thanks dolphin. That is exactly the reason I started playing it, and so far it has been anything but boring.
The Budapest is a great opening. Please, play it against me.
To be honest, I'm slightly troubled about the best way to meet real & sound gambits like the Albin, but the Budapest is quite easy...
Here white played the right move 10.Na4! (in place of 10.Kh1 as in Gelfand- Rapport) and had a pleasant, risk-free edge (11.c5!? is quite annoying, too). What the hell Postny was thinking to miss the simple 18.Nxe7+ Qxe7 19.f6 with a huge advantage, I have no idea. And OK, missing one move is understandable, but white can play even stronger 18.Bf6! or even 18.Bh5 Nxf5 19.g4! Nxe3 20.Qf3, winning in both instances (I admit that the last line is a tad Houdinesque).
Black should probably play 16...Rh6, but after the simple prophylactic move 17.Qe1 white will play Rf3-g3, or Qg3, and Black's position is quite unpleasant.
At least the Albin is a real gambit, where Black gets real compensation.
I like the Budapest...as white.
Black just gets a boring position that is just begging for a draw. White can't really refute this gambit, but it looks like black is playing for two results.
I think people play it only because it looks cool to fake gambit a pawn and then getting it back.
I don't believe this to be true at all. (Though the theme of the White d4 c4 player underestimating the Budapest is very common.) The positions that arise out of the Budapest are varied, depending on what White and Black choose. We have seen posted in this forum various videos and comments from different IMs and GMs on what they think is the single best way to handle the Budapest. I've noticed there's no consensus between them. What some masters say is the critical test others say gives Black equality.
No one plays the Budapest because it "looks cool". With the way the Budapest is denigrated and looked down apon, playing it is the equivalent of wearing a fanny pack. It's a practical, not fashionable choice. It's been one of my most successful openings. I've been playing it since I started chess, I enjoy it, there are no serious problems with it, I see no reason to stop playing it. Just like there would be no reason to stop wearing a fanny pack, the only reason could be caring about what other people think, which I don't. I'm a practical guy, you see. My d4 c4 repertoire is complete, and I'm spending my time studying other things while you're switching from the Nimzo-Indian to the Chigorin or whatever opening you're going to play next.
There are many different ideas in the Budapest against anything White can throw at it, many ideas to play for a win. You look at this opening from the perspective of an outsider visiting a foreign country. You don't know your way around or how to get anywhere within it, and this is why it looks that way to you. For someone who lives here and knows the geography it's different.
If you've been playing it since you started chess, how can you say that is the most successful? Perhaps you would have gotten even better results with other stuff against d4.
I tried different openings and this made my chess journey much more interesting. I'm glad I did. The Nimzo is fun to play.
How can you enjoy playing a position like that as black, I don't know. To each his own I guess.
This is my latest game, witch I lost because im stupid. pfren I would love to play you but I tried to challenge you to an unrated but your not accecpting challenges.
Pfren, it's not very convincing that you show a game where White drew and reference super GM Gelfand's loss to it as evidence that the Budapest is easy to play against.
What about Black's ninth move, I don't think moving an a pawn is best before you complete your development. I have a system for playing against the Adler variation based on a few concepts. One is capture back the pawn as soon as possible, another is relieve the "knight tension" by capturing on f3 if White allows. You see how Postny understood this so he traded on e5 first. The next simple concept is classical development with the exception of the kingside knight. After the pawn is recaptured Black should try to complete development strictly according to classical rules. There's one more minor piece that needs to be developed so on move 9... Black should have preferred d6 instead of moving a rook pawn. Later, if a kingside attack gets underway, Black always has a rook lift via Re8 - e6 as an option.
And I never said anything about it being a gambit. Queens gambit's not a real gambit either but I still enjoy playing that. If I have a question about gambits ill be sure to ask.
Ohboyohboyohboy!
Another Budapest thread with Pfren and Dolphin27! Just what we need as Summer draws to a close.
Plutonia, I enjoy your posts and I wish you luck with the Nimzo-Indian and Chigorin.
When I play the Budapest that thought of my opponent falling for the Kieninger Trap doesn't even cross my mind. That's happened like twice in all the games I've played, it's very uncommon for someone to allow that.
Why the Budapest gets a trappy reputation because some people can't see a mate in one threat I don't know, don't other openings have traps too? One of the key ideas of the Budapest is the positional idea of establishing a knight on e5. If White then ever plays f4 to kick the knight, a backwards pawn is created on a semi-open file. The Budapest is a positional opening.
I am aware of the manuevers Black can use to avoid giving up the bishop pair in the Rubinstein Nbd2 variation. 9...Bc5 is an idea, but why is the mainline so scary exactly? Oh my gosh, a knight on e5 vs a dark square bishop! In the Nimzo-Indian Black gives up their dark square bishop for a knight as well.
I like playing this position because I enjoy battles between minor pieces, and also that old Budapest theme always seems to crop up, the theme of the overconfident White player who thinks they have a forced win and at worst draw, and who believes they're immune from losing.
I'd like to invite all the players who are skeptical of the Budapest - Plutonia, SmyslovFan, Pfren, ect, to take an extended tour of this chess opening by playing it yourselves from the Black side. It is my hope that some of you will become permanent citizens, as in the land of the Budapest Gambit there's always room for one more. By the way SmyslovFan, I do recognize that you're a strong player, and I apologize for implying you weren't all those months ago. Now go give the Budapest Gambit a try from the Black side, just as the young Vladimir Kramnik did:
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1500222
This is my latest game, witch I lost because im stupid. pfren I would love to play you but I tried to challenge you to an unrated but your not accecpting challenges.
Don't be too hard on yourself. You're not stupid at all, and as you keep playing you'll improve. It looks like you played very well in that game minus a few serious blunders at the end. As GM Maurice Ashley says "losing is learning".
Whats best dealing with this opening as white. I've been struggling trying to keep the pawn with Nf3.