Jaenisch Gambit against 1.c4

Sort:
MatthewFreitag

The gambit's point is to:

1. Open up the bishop diagonal.

2. Get a small lead in development

3. Trade a semi-important c pawn for a bad b pawn.

Sred

@MatthewFreitag,

b6 would open the diagonal without giving away the pawn, and there is no trade, because the extra pawn will be defended. Development lead, really?

MatthewFreitag
Sred wrote:

@MatthewFreitag,

b6 would open the diagonal without giving away the pawn, and there is no trade, because the extra pawn will be defended. Development lead, really?

I never said it was a good gambit. I actually think the gambit is very bad. It's not even tricky like the Englund, it's just plain bad.

b6 is a better response, but it doesn't develop with tempo.

Sred
MatthewFreitag wrote:
Sred wrote:

@MatthewFreitag,

b6 would open the diagonal without giving away the pawn, and there is no trade, because the extra pawn will be defended. Development lead, really?

I never said it was a good gambit. I actually think the gambit is very bad. It's not even tricky like the Englund, it's just plain bad.

b6 is a better response, but it doesn't develop with tempo.

I think we might agree that Black gets a short term tempo as "compensation".

Sred

@MatthewFreitag, and let me point out that Black can't make use of his c pawn without spending 2 tempi - or trade it for the b pawn.

MatthewFreitag

Yes I agree with you the compensation is very questionable.

StrawberryPlushie11
White can play 3 e4 instead of bxa6. Now black is just down a pawn and has the b5 pawn cramping his queenside.
Blunderseeker

 Benko Gambit works. This is rather similar but I would still prefer the good old benko. 

blueemu

Jules Moussard (a GM rated 2625 Classical, or 2722 Rapid) has actually been known to play a reversed version of this gambit:

 

Sred
KnightErrant97 wrote:
White can play 3 e4 instead of bxa6. Now black is just down a pawn and has the b5 pawn cramping his queenside.

bxa6 indeed  makes no sense at all.