I have always liked the KG. I am afraid I don't have the skill or style (or something) for it, heh. Years ago when I played OTB in the USCF a few of the players including the top rated master in the club (who was maybe 12?) transposed to the KG (by the vienna game?). His move order was simply 1 e4 e5 2 nc3 ... and 3 f4. Most people knew it but the move order was for some surprise, and although he knew the lines very well, lesser players might get confused. As stated it could be an aggressive opening, but also can end up being a defensive one as well. By defensive I mean getting some positional advantages and having to defend them. When successful, like any good opening, it could show that it was also an opening about endgames. Maybe if I started playing earlier I could be the type of player to use the KG. It is an exciting opening that I still enjoy observing. ... For now I play the QG which seems to be more my style.
IS KING GAMBIT A GOOD OPENING
Nope, sorry. I use it against strong players and they usually bite the dust, especially in the Muzio Gambit.
The king's gambit requires white to play e5 in response to e4, which is a lot worse than it seems. King's gambit is good, but requires skill to use and like the queens gambit has a trap in being declined(queens gambit has two, kings gambit has one). Also, the fred defense(e4 f5) is simply the king's gambit played by black(without having to rely on e5 to pull it off) and should not be frowned apon as "a bad defense with an 'en prise' pawn".
A good opening for whom? For Black or for White?
I play Bird's Opening and the From Gambit bothers some White players enough that they switch to the King's Gambit.
1.f4 1.e5 2.e4
It seems to me some From Gambit players may be hoping for the blackside of the King's Gambit.
Good for whom? Whomever does the kings gambit(slightly better for white if white does it than for black if black does it). Anyway, doesn't that transpose to kings gambit?
It's an interesting opening but probably gives equal play that is easier for White.
mandelshtam wrote:
its a good way to die fast, for both sides. People who don't live an interesting , but long life accuse the rest of 'burning out fast'...
Entertaining. Say something else deep and philosophical.
Oh, and Chuck Yeager (85 years old), Kurt Vonnegut (died at 84), Boris Spassky (age 71), Clint Eastwood (age 78), etc., ad nauseam.
I particularly liked the proposition that something categorized as "easy" is defined by being able to be explained on one sheet of paper. I wonder, though, how big is the paper and how small are we allowed to write? Can we use both sides? If we can only use one side, if we DO use both, does it become moderately difficult?
So interesting...
KB,
The Fischer line would be a pretty good choice. Most American players have probably used it at least once in their games.
emm guys even if white takes the pawn he can still protect it
thats why KG isnt used in high rtd games
and all the books from 19th century or so say that blak canot stop kG
wrong!these years kG was one of the greatest openings but now blak has the weapon to stop it! the antidote"to kG is e4 e5, f4 exf4,Nf3 b5!
try it ,its powerfull
but! ifu r planing for a king side castle dont do it!
1.e4 e5, 2.f4 ef, 3.Nf3 b5, 4.B:b5 Bb7, 5.d3 g5 (what else?), 6.h4 g4 (what else?), 7.Ne5.
White has a clear advantage, he wins one of the two pawns f4 or g4. He must win because blacks position on the kingside is weakened, and black has no counterplay for the lost pawn.
Am I wrong somewhere?
There are good posts about KG in this old KG topic:
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/kings-gambit2?lc=1
Thanks gardelin, some of those posts are very interesting.
I agree with mandelshtam and killerbeez - but variations refuting the supposed equality suddenly emerge ... e.g. the Evans Gambit - written off for 5 decades then gets a new life ... - even the Danish Gambit - there has been some new life injected though not enough for top-level play [plus the Goring Gambit prevents a crucial reply so the Goring is less unpopular in the Danish/Goring complex...] ... in particular the schteleter is less fashionable because of good anti-schteleter Danish lines.
Yakov Estrin's book on The King's Gambit is probably the definative work on the subject.
One of the best, doubtless.
I am not much experienced with KG. In my experience, bishop always create great trouble. The atraction of this opening is the rook file
actually, I think fischer said that it loses by force but that's probably only for players over 2000 elo. There are many wrong moves black can make if he doesn't know it well. Still white isn't the only one who can attack: black can also get a strong attack while keeping the extra pawn by threatening a knight by moving g7 to g5 to g4 and the check the king at h4 with the queen. Pretty interesting.
Fischer never said that. He claimed that his defense 1.e4 e5, 2.f4 ef, 3.Nf3 d6 leads to a better game for black (which indeed would mean a 'refutation', in the language of theoreticians!) but he never proved that conclusively.
To the contrary, Bronstein claimed that the above Fischer defense leads to an excellent position for white.
I have to shut up from here, since I cannot compete with the two coryphea...
Anyway, Fischer's defense has many open questions, too. Here is one:
1.e4 e5, 2.f4 ef, 3.Nf3 d6, 4.d4 g5, 5.h4 g4, 6.Ng1.
How do you play with black? If white wins back the pawn (I don't see how to hinder that), black still remains with some weak squares on the kingside... (f5,g5, also the pawn f7). Well, also white has a weakened kingside, and has just made a 'stepback' in development...
Glaskov and Estrin claim, white has an excellent position.
Perhaps Black can try 6....f5 (I never saw an analysis on that).
I like the Kings Gambit because many people haven't a clue what they're doing. If you know what you are dong, it is useful in speed chess.