I Created A New CounterGambit!! I Call It "Tintas CounterGambit" - Chess Forums - Page 2

PoyrazGambitMaster

24 days ago

0

#21

DylanIsDumb0 yazdı:

Gambits like these could actually put you in very great positions, good for you for finding this!

Thanks!

PoyrazGambitMaster

24 days ago

0

#22

Compadre_J yazdı:

I wrote a long message.

Then the forum page refreshed and I lost everything I wrote.

I don’t feel like re-writing it all again.

So what I will say is have you considered castles?

I think it could be an improvement move to the variation your talking about.

I wrote a very long and detailed message explaining the virtues which I liked about castles vs. . Sadly, the page refresh was brutal.

2 hours to write the message for it to get erased in 5 seconds.

No auto save on these forums or nothing.

the engine says castling is bad

Compadre_J

24 days ago

0

#23

PoyrazGambitMaster wrote:

Compadre_J yazdı:

I wrote a long message.

Then the forum page refreshed and I lost everything I wrote.

I don’t feel like re-writing it all again.

So what I will say is have you considered castles?

I think it could be an improvement move to the variation your talking about.

I wrote a very long and detailed message explaining the virtues which I liked about castles vs. . Sadly, the page refresh was brutal.

2 hours to write the message for it to get erased in 5 seconds.

No auto save on these forums or nothing.

the engine says castling is bad

When did you start caring about what the engine had to say?

trw0311

24 days ago

0

#24

I also wanted to add, when black attempts this blacckburn-schilling “gambit”, they are immediately losing anyway, just trade knights and white has a better position. In this case you’re just actually making yourself much worse. However I don’t think anyone good plays the Blackburn schilling because it’s just so bad I don’t even know why it is a named opening!

PoyrazGambitMaster

24 days ago

0

#25

Compadre_J yazdı:

PoyrazGambitMaster wrote:

Compadre_J yazdı:

I wrote a long message.

Then the forum page refreshed and I lost everything I wrote.

I don’t feel like re-writing it all again.

So what I will say is have you considered castles?

I think it could be an improvement move to the variation your talking about.

I wrote a very long and detailed message explaining the virtues which I liked about castles vs. . Sadly, the page refresh was brutal.

2 hours to write the message for it to get erased in 5 seconds.

No auto save on these forums or nothing.

the engine says castling is bad

When did you start caring about what the engine had to say?

well lemme explain it a little longer to you, first of all, white doesent need to castle fast since his king is not in danger.

Second of all, black playing d6 is a huge problem when we castle. but when we dont castle, if he plays d6 the position comes close to equal

so i dont think castling is required so early.

PoyrazGambitMaster

24 days ago

0

#26

trw0311 yazdı:

I also wanted to add, when black attempts this blacckburn-schilling “gambit”, they are immediately losing anyway, just trade knights and white has a better position. In this case you’re just actually making yourself much worse. However I don’t think anyone good plays the Blackburn schilling because it’s just so bad I don’t even know why it is a named opening!

Well, I think this gambit would be usefull in beginner-intermediate players to trick the opponent since they are more open to making mistakes

trw0311

24 days ago

0

#27

PoyrazGambitMaster wrote:

trw0311 yazdı:

I also wanted to add, when black attempts this blacckburn-schilling “gambit”, they are immediately losing anyway, just trade knights and white has a better position. In this case you’re just actually making yourself much worse. However I don’t think anyone good plays the Blackburn schilling because it’s just so bad I don’t even know why it is a named opening!

Well, I think this gambit would be usefull in beginner-intermediate players to trick the opponent since they are more open to making mistakes

That’s kind of the problem people In this thread have though. Will your line win? Sure it will, especially with new players. But in the spirit of chess improvement it’s just not a good idea to play a blunder just because your opponent will have a hard time finding the moves. Eventually they won’t have a hard time finding the moves and you will never get better. If new players play this horrendous Blackburn schilling then punish them for it by playing the correct Nx, and then you have a winning position.

Compadre_J

24 days ago

0

#28

PoyrazGambitMaster wrote:

Compadre_J yazdı:

PoyrazGambitMaster wrote:

Compadre_J yazdı:

I wrote a long message.

Then the forum page refreshed and I lost everything I wrote.

I don’t feel like re-writing it all again.

So what I will say is have you considered castles?

I think it could be an improvement move to the variation your talking about.

I wrote a very long and detailed message explaining the virtues which I liked about castles vs. . Sadly, the page refresh was brutal.

2 hours to write the message for it to get erased in 5 seconds.

No auto save on these forums or nothing.

the engine says castling is bad

When did you start caring about what the engine had to say?

well lemme explain it a little longer to you, first of all, white doesent need to castle fast since his king is not in danger.

Second of all, black playing d6 is a huge problem when we castle. but when we dont castle, if he plays d6 the position comes close to equal

so i dont think castling is required so early.

I think castling is the best move.

Keep In mind, I am talking about the below position.

You have been playing 7.d4

I think the moves castles is better vs. d4 because it isn’t clear where the D pawn should go.

The D pawn could go to D3 to help protect E4 or the D pawn could go to D4 to gain space next to E4. The D pawn has multiple possibilities.

To me pushing the D pawn is a very committal move because you don’t really know where the best location is for the D pawn.

Castles, on the other hand, is normal move. What alternatives do you really have?

White needs King Safety!

White has moved no Queen side pieces so castling Queen side seems off the table.

Black King lost castling rights so the Black King will most likely be stuck in middle of the board which means you as White will want to place heavy pieces (Rooks & Queen) near the center to attack Black which means White King can’t stay in the center or it will get in the way.

Gluonsghost

24 days ago

0

#29

PoyrazGambitMaster wrote:

I Think I May Be The First Person To Find It. If Im Not, Please Tell Me.

Your wish is my command.

You are not.

I found 19 games after 4. Bxf7+.

The earliest being Carl Nater v Ian Rodgers, Begonia 1975 & the last on the list being Bill Ward v Andrew Allport, Online 2018.

So many start with engines believing they are the be all and end all. Me? I start with historical databases. Why spending the time sifting through what an engine says if a human as already done all the heavy lifting??

But don't let that discourage you, it is better to rediscover something than miss it all together.

Pax ominous!

trw0311

24 days ago

0

#30

Gluonsghost wrote:

PoyrazGambitMaster wrote:

I Think I May Be The First Person To Find It. If Im Not, Please Tell Me.

Your wish is my command.

You are not.

I found 19 games after 4. Bxf7+.

The earliest being Carl Nater v Ian Rodgers, Begonia 1975 & the last on the list being Bill Ward v Andrew Allport, Online 2018.

So many start with engines believing they are the be all and end all. Me? I start with historical databases. Why spending the time sifting through what an engine says if a human as already done all the heavy lifting??

But don't let that discourage you, it is better to rediscover something than miss it all together.

Pax ominous!

We dont need engines or databases to confirm that this "novelty" is unsound. It is an unsound response to an unsound opening. Literally just an opening blunder. There are no forcing moves really, its just dependent on bad play from black to get to this banal tactical sequence. There are good Bxf6 sacrifices in the italian game, this isnt one lol. Case closed!

FerrariXYZ

23 days ago

0

#31

looks like a good gambit for beginners

apple_pineapple84

23 days ago

0

#32

If you take on d4 then play c3 or 0-0 it's a secure advantage

PoyrazGambitMaster

23 days ago

0

#33

FerrariXYZ yazdı:

looks like a good gambit for beginners

thanks for the review

PoyrazGambitMaster

23 days ago

0

#34

apple_pineapple84 yazdı:

If you take on d4 then play c3 or 0-0 it's a secure advantage

youre right, but gambits are mainly for fun and risks thats why this could be a gambit

aerefs

22 days ago

0

#35

I have a similar gambit with a knight sac added

Matthew1232196

19 days ago

0

#36

It is the Italian game

sndeww

19 days ago

0

#37

This is too hard for beginners and early intermediates because they can't memorize anything.

Higher rated players can memorize this, but they won't do it because their opponents wont implode with ...Nxe4. That being said, I can't be too critical since my first game on chess.com (1100) ended with my king in the center while i mated him with two bishops while down a million points of material.

A few people have pointed out that for improvement, it's best not to play this way, which is true, but not everyone plays to improve. Sometimes, you just want to have some fun.

On the plus side, I'm quite happy to see an "I invented an opening post" where the poster actually posts real analysis, even if it uses suboptimal moves. I appreciate the effort. Here are some interesting novel (ties) that I've found: