How to play against Budapest Gambit

The Budapest is a bust.

In 15 years' time, SF will say so, remember my words well.

SF's evaluation for the Budapest will be around 150cps or so.

See you then.

personally ?....I'd play very-very carefully.....only 'cuz it's Friday the 13th.

More high quality analysis.  Bigly practical.  Can't wait to use it in a real game!

MrDodgy, there have been some concrete recommendations in all this. You just gotta dig to find it. But no, there's been no serious attempt to refute the line posted.

I asked if the distinction between "poor" and "refuted" is important from the point of view of practical play at the amateur level.

Indeed he does, but is that the important point for amateurs? Could it be that, for the readers, this is what matters?

"... Practice has shown that it is very risky for White to defend the [e5 pawn] tooth and nail ... The variation which I recommend to you is aimed at ... obtaining an advantage which may not be very great but which is stable. ..."

For amateur White, what does it matter whether or not some grandmaster knows a refutation if nobody is explaining how to do the refuting? For amateur Black, is it undesirable to use a poor opening anyway? If one uses the Budapest as a surprise, would a hypothetical refutation be likely to be known to one's amateur opponent?

"... If you are looking forward to trying your hand at this double-edged variation, the alternative [1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e5 3 dxe5 Ng5 4 Bf4 Nc6 5 Nf3 Bb4+] 6 Nbd2 may come as a cold shower. White ... sticks to a strategy of simple and sound development. ... [After 6...Qe7 7 e3 Ngxe5 8 Nxe5 Nxe5 9 Be2] his dark-squared bishop is actively placed on f4, while its counterpart is not really being very useful on b4." - GM Paul van der Sterren (2009)

Whose analysis you call superficial?

I invited everyone to refute my +200cps winning lines for white, no one did.

We are in agreement. Your analysis isn't superficial, its deliberately false.

Well it's still not clear to me how can an opening be refuted ? As long as chess is played by human players there's no refutation of any opening.....We have to realise that we're not living in a world ruled by machines... Even if there's a technical refutation I am certainly sure after 10 years there still will be someone playing this opening even after knowing he is playing something too risky.....

people are over-complicating the situation here.

1.budapest doesnt lose by force, not even agaisnt the best book line or engine opposition

2.the position black gets agaisnt the best replies however are not pleasant to most master level players. having to give the bishop for, well... not much and white's pawns having easy room to expand is not ideal

i recall early in my chess career having to give up  a  specific variation of the nimzowitsch defense (1.e4 nc6 2.nf3 d6 3.d4 nf6 4.nc3 bg4) bc one of the main lines was busted by a computer and the alternative was to give the bishop pair for absolutely no compensation. i tried that agaisnt an equally strong opponent OTB, and i went down in flames. But the worst part is that during post-mortem, black really didnt do almost any mistake, it was just that black's position is reduced to compete passivity and reactive moves agaisnt decent play by white.

this I fear is a similar fate to improving budapest players who are moving to expert and master level. they play more prepared opponents that know how to reduce black to a boring inferior position, until they eventually give it up. its not just that white is about 0.5 up, some lines of the KID are like 0.5 too. It's that the resulting positions really give black limited chances if white doesnt want an exciting game.

There is no reason for black to give up the bishop pair in the Budapest (except voluntarily to ruin white's pawn structure).

in the main line with bf4, nf3, nbd2, e3 etc, the dark squared bishop is pretty bad if its not traded on d2. it just ends up harrassed by moves like a3 and b4, with nothing to bite on,and looking silly on b6. the remedy is worse than the ailment.

But they are A LOT of sidelines in the budapest, if you have a line agaisnt the white formation i mentioend above that keeps the bishop pair without leaving one of the bishops silly, im all ears.

tell me which lines does justice to the dark squared bishop?

8. ... 0-0 is fine.  If white plays 9. 0-0 then the idea in Taylor's Budapest book is Ng6 Bg3 Bd6.  There are some different move orders and tactics but that's the key idea.  For example, in the line you give the most popular move is not 8. Be2 but 8.  Nxe5.  After Nxe5 a3 then black can play Bc5 b4 Bd4 and is equal.  There isn't a way to force black to give up the dark squared bishop for a knight.

what about here? how do you preserve the bishop ? 9.a3 bc5 10. b4 is good for black even with bd4 but 10.nb3! wins the bishop pair if your point is entirely on the bishop preserving side.

idk, about happy. what does black get for all his trouble? at best a slightly inferior endgame where a strong master will make your life miserable facing the two bishops. 

"... In the main variation 4.Bf4 Bb4+ 5.Nbd2 Nc6 6.Nf3 Qe7 7.e3 ... [White] returns the pawn, but thanks to his [c4 pawn], from then on he controls more space in the centre and frequently obtains the advantage of the bishop pair, with the result that it is very difficult for Black to find effective counterplay. For his part, Black can deviate from this plan at various points - 6...f6, 5...d6?! or 4...g5. But if White reacts correctly, 4...g5 or 6...f6 leads once more to a slightly worse position with little counterplay, whereas 5...d6?!, with all the complications which it calls into being, is probably objectively simply unsound and can very quickly cost the game." - IM Valeri Bronznik (2011)

Are you recommending that line or simply copying and pasting?

My recommendation is that the quote be considered.