kings gambit dubious?
Sort:
gchess33 wrote:
Just4Relxation wrote:
I find it hilarious that patzers are challenging Fischer's assessment of the King's Gambit hiding behind their favorite search engine. For an experiment I registered my ICC account as a computer using Houdini's latest pro version and running on the top of the line Alienware gaming computer. Black won every King's Gambit against all the other top-rated computer engines. But if you like to lose games, go ahead and play it. It's no skin off my nose.
There are some recent strong engine vs. engine games where White did not lose playing King's gambit. Below is from TCEC Season 10 Stage 1 Round 15.
Now I know you may be thinking that a draw in King's gambit where one engine is much stronger than the other shows that the opening is inferior. But both engines are very strong in comparison to club players, and yet White holds just fine. There may be a refutation to King's Gambit, but if it exists, it isn't obvious right now. My conclusion is that it works fine for club players and even titled players if they like the positions. The reason it has fallen out of favor is because it is a very sharp, risky opening where the results won't be as reliable as with a solid proven opening like the Ruy Lopez.
The difference in strength between the 2 engines is orders of magnitude, 600 elo: that is if Kasparov
would play you. 
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:
gchess33 wrote:
Just4Relxation wrote:
I find it hilarious that patzers are challenging Fischer's assessment of the King's Gambit hiding behind their favorite search engine. For an experiment I registered my ICC account as a computer using Houdini's latest pro version and running on the top of the line Alienware gaming computer. Black won every King's Gambit against all the other top-rated computer engines. But if you like to lose games, go ahead and play it. It's no skin off my nose.
There are some recent strong engine vs. engine games where White did not lose playing King's gambit. Below is from TCEC Season 10 Stage 1 Round 15.
Now I know you may be thinking that a draw in King's gambit where one engine is much stronger than the other shows that the opening is inferior. But both engines are very strong in comparison to club players, and yet White holds just fine. There may be a refutation to King's Gambit, but if it exists, it isn't obvious right now. My conclusion is that it works fine for club players and even titled players if they like the positions. The reason it has fallen out of favor is because it is a very sharp, risky opening where the results won't be as reliable as with a solid proven opening like the Ruy Lopez.
The difference in strength between the 2 engines is orders of magnitude, 600 elo: that is if Kasparov
would play you.
No, the difference in playing strength between me and Kasparov is far greater than that (more like 1300 elo, not 600).
Here's a King's Gambit game where the engines were closer in strength.
Nov 2, 2017
0
#27
@gchess33, It's good that you found a game where White holds against a stronger engine in the KG (btw, just think for a moment about that statement), but is there any chance you can find one in the Accepted lines? That is likely to be the true test of the gambit, after all.
Nov 2, 2017
0
#29
Bet you won't find one in the Fischer line, something white players love to see.
Nov 2, 2017
0
#30
It may be dubious to a grandmaster or even a master, but not to a non-master. If GM Boris Spassky could beat GM Bobby Fischer with it, non-masters can easily lose to it.
Of course, the question is: how easily? It would be interesting to see a %age W-L-D of a very large sample of non-master games.
Yes, I consider the King's Gambit to be dubious. The f-pawn occupies a square which is the gateway to your king, why would you gratuitously expose your king? The Queen's Gambit, on the other hand, is eminently sound and I play it every chance I get.