King’s Gambit

The King's Gambit was faraway the most popular opening in the nineteenth century. It retains its appeal to fearless attackers today.

What move should black make after Kings's Gambit Accepted, King's Knight Gambit?

After 2... exf4 the f file is open for White, eventually, maybe, to launch an attack on f7 with rooks, unless Black defends the pawn on f4

The King’s Gambit is one of the oldest openings in chess and for good reason. The possibilities the opening presents have intrigued the greatest chess minds for years including greats such as Spassky, Tal, and Fischer. White, on the second move challenges black’s center and begins an attack at the black kingside.

Black can accept or decline the gambit. Most players choose to accept the gambit and try to counterattack the now semi-exposed king side of white. If accepted white should focus their attention on the f7 square which is now a big weakness for black. After 2 exf4 white has two good options. The first option is to immediately start the attack with 3. Bc4, putting immediate pressure on the f7 square. The second option is 3. Nf3 which defends against 3 Qh4+ and also starts to develop an attack on the king side.

The good thing about the King’s Gambit is it is very unpredictable. If your opponent is not very familiar with how to defend they can find themselves in big trouble early. Most games are very wide open and have exciting and dynamic lines. For the creative chess player that likes to use exotic combinations and wild sacrifices, the King’s Gambit is the perfect opening.

If Black tries to retain the pawn at f4, with best play on both sides White will win. Black, on the other hand, can get a good position giving up the pawn advantage.

Where to begin?....(1) Mindless faith in chess egnines (2) Bobby Fischers 1960 something article that is never wrong (3) A certain myopic no name greek I.M (4) The teachings of Botvinnik (5) Anyone who has received lessons (6) Various subjective books.....and so it goes on.

http://www.academicchess.org/images/pdf/chessgames/fischerbust.pdf

It is rumored that Bobby Fischer wrote this article after losing a game with Black against the King's gambit.

no rumor.  this was the game

He must have been frustrated but believe it or not the king;s gambit is not refuted.

yeah, it's work for me, king's gambit

Have you anything to support this statement? Others please don't respond, "it's bunkum". Urk already said that . Could we also resist from zero informational responses like "nice gambits", "it's working for me". That's more tedious than bunkum, at least bunkum might get a decent argument going...

Graham Burgess (GB) in "The Mammoth Book of Chess" says Steinitz was responsible for making this gambit less fashionable. His  argument: an attack is only justified when an advantage has been secured, and an advantage can be secured only when  the opponent has gone wrong. Since 1...e5 is not a fatal error , White should not be launching an attack. But, whatever Steinitz says, the gambit is still popular amongst top players, e.g, the Polgars favour the King's Bishop Gambit, 2...exf4 3. Bc4

I think the question is about white playing king's gambit and how black respond to it.

Here's a game that just went very well for me playing King's  gambit, where my aim was to put as much pressure on the f7 square as early as possible, hoping that the rook down the open f file would help. It worked well against a player of the same (1300-1400 standard.) Hypothesis: the average "advanced beginner" is liable to be caught out by the extra pressure on f7 from the King's gambit. Anyone think this hypothesis is reasonable?