How to gain from a gambit?

I don't see what you huys are all prejudiced on this site for. Just because my rating is lower in on-line play doesn't mean that I have no experience. On-line ratings mean nothing in reality, and you have no knowledge of my play off the screen.

Reb, if using the term garbage to describe the gambit hurt your feelings, then I'm sorry. I'll try to be more sensitive in the future.

I believe that this gambit is nonsense, and if Grandmasters think it's too risky, then I'll stick with their analysis, not anyone else's. And if masters don't want to sacrifice pawns, then what about Tal, Shirov, or any other modern dynamic players who routinely sacrifice pieces?

The Queen's Gambit is also a highly respected opening, so I wouldn't say that masters don't sacrifice early, either.

Let's not argue about this, though. It has nothing to do with the original topic.

 Your problem is that you refuse to listen to your betters, you dont even believe fritz or rybka apparently so I am not surprised you wont listen to me or other much stronger players than yourself. I agree that online ratings have little meaning but from what I have seen you say about chess its obvious to me you are a very weak player with little understanding of the game, in spite of your "experience". As for another remark you made about masters going through the morra gambit sicilian you are wrong there too. Fischer even played it once against Korchnoi and Korchnoi certainly didnt go through Fischer, the game ending in a draw. Fischer even once said he believed the morra was good enough for a draw but not more but ofcourse I guess you know better ? 

Masters don't like to give up pawns, good hard material, in the opening for a prospective advantage that they'll have to fight like hell to make into a reality. Some players like to gamble more but most professionals don't and find such gambits to be bad for their resume.

The fact that you are boasting about being my better without even knowing me or how I play or even playing me for that matter proves that you are not. To the best of my knowledge, I have never advocated an unsound idea, I have never suggested a blatantly losing line to anyone on this site, and I have only been giving my opinion on this topic, so I don't believe that your inferring that i am "a very weak player" from what you have read is fair. In fact, your conduct towards me has been very rude.

I believe that you are nothing more than a bully who accusses others of being poor players when they don't agree with him.

You have no idea about my play off the screen, so I don't think you can logically form any opinion about my playing strength that anyone here will listen to. I have no arguement with you, and I have formed no opinion on your playing style; only your additude. I have no reason to refer to you as my better until you can prove this to me. Just because you say you are, doesn't mean you actually are. So just stow it.

If I don't want to play a gambit in my games, there is really nothing you can do about it.

Getting an advantage after gambiting a pawn is not as hard as it seems. If you think that gambits are not played on a master level, then it is you who need to review some games again.

 Tell me Daniel, what "experience" do you have in chess off the internet ? Any ? Have you ever even played in a rated tournament ? Do you have an otb rating? If so, what is it? I have looked at the games you played here and you are a weak player/beginner. You should NOT be giving advice to others and especially people that are clearly better than you. However, thats not even enough for your arrogance, you even question strong programs such as fritz. I only have a problem with weak players when they act like you do...... I played my first tournament in 1973, when was yours ? I have beaten professional players in otb tournaments, yes IMs and even a few GMs, but if a GM was here calling me down about some of my chess opinions or analysis I would certainly listen to him. I also dont question the analysis of the engines rated over 2800 for obvious reasons. You call an opening like the kings gambit "garbage" and dont even know what you are talking about. I dont think world champions like Spassky would play "garbage" openings and I dont think world champions like Fischer and Karpov would lose to "garbage" openings either.

I have the right to give advice to whoever I feel like. If I have played some bad games on this site, it doesn't mean I am a bad player. I never questioned Fritz analysis, so I don't know where you got that idea from. If you are referring to another thread, the only time I remember mentioning Fritz was when I was saying that I liked a line I had found better than Fritz's line because I believed that the line was more interesting.

Obviously, champions like Fischer didn't only lose to the gambit, they lost to the player and the entire game. In fact, Fischer had a better opening position in a few of those games. By the way, Fischer also thought little of the gambit.

As I said, stow it. Why don't you bother someone at home?

Reb, as much as I have always respected you, you may have overlooked something very important here.  If Daniel3's birthday is as stated on his profile page, then he is 16 years old.  Therefore, he is an absolute authority on any subject which he might choose to address.  You, on the other hand, are only a National Master.  So there!

 You are weak and your advice is too often "garbage" so I prefer to bother you as long as you insist on giving garbage advice. Others have tried to "correct" you and even help you to no avail, you are so sure you are right but you are not right. You need to learn to listen to the stronger players here and you might learn something, instead of arguing with them. When I analyze games with IMs and GMs I learn a lot , but only because I listen to them....

Correct me if I'm wrong. But did you just say that Fischer didn't like the King's gambit?

I never said I was an absolute authority.

Why can't you guys leave me alone? Every time I try to give my opinion, you have something to say against it. And you never understand what I'm trying to say.

I'm going to ignore you from now on. You've been a pain for long enough.

Dude.  He's a National Master.  You're 16.  Are you claiming to be a NM?

I'm not claiming any such thing. Only I don't think he should be putting anybody down because he thinks his opinion is better. I don't care if his chess is better than mine, he should still be civil towards other people's opinions.

All opinions do not deserve equal respect.  This is not school.  Welcome to the real world.

This is pointless. I'm not replying to this topic any more.

Daniel3 is the rich or North America. Young, ignorant, and incapable of admitting wrong.

Just give due respect to time-tested experience? Hey, that sounds like...wisdom.

I play alot gambit's, and I have to say the soundest one I've played is the morra smith.  I've played this hundred's of times and I've  never lost a game in the opening, and almost never after 10-15 moves had a losing postion when playing SM.  The games I've lost have been because I was out played in the middle or endgame. No matter whant opening you play if black plays accurately it will lead to an equal middle game.    

Only one person has played e6, followed by a6 on the next move on this site, but e6 and a6 get played in most games just not alway's right away. Here's the one game with an early a6/e6 I played on this sight, my opponent resigned in what appears to be an even position. It's not the best exapmle.

I do get a fair amount of cheap wins with it where black falls for a trap, but for the most part class B and up they don't fall for any traps. They play the opening accurately, maybe not theoretically best line, but there not going into the middlegame with any major weakness.  Also you have to consider you(Gonnosuke) are on comletely different levels as far as chess skill. You can convert much smaller advantages into wins, where I still need my opponent to make a blunder or a couple mistakes to win. If get to the point where I'm losing games because of my opening play I'll switch, but right now the pawn isn't a factor the outcome of the game, I lose games in the middle game and let wins turn into draws in the ending, so I'm trying to work on that right now.   

You know what is wise and mature? Ripping into a 16 year old kid on a chess site.

I'd been ruminating over this very thing for several days. I don't believe in "ripping into" anyone, but lately I've noticed folks asserting that youthful posters should receive a free pass (or at least specal consideration) to say whatever they want without repercussions.  While I agree that younger posters may not have the maturity at times to be as circumspect as they could be, I think there's a lot to be learned in how people react to one's comments, and to simply let something slide is to tacitly agree with it.  Anyone who feels old enough to post their ideas in a public forum needs to be ready to accept the feedback whether positive or negative. I don't feel anyone should have to check a poster's profile to determine his age before replying or that anyone should have to monitor his or her own reply according to some criterion. But maybe I'm wrong.