You can upload files directly to chess.com under Resources, Downloads, Add your download.
King's Gambit, why not played at master level?
Sort:
Upload it at mediafire.com and share the link here please.
rigamagician wrote:
You can upload files directly to chess.com under Resources, Downloads, Add your download.
Hmm, I didn't know you could do that...
But I see it only allows compressed files, would have been nice if they allowed small pgn's too.
Jun 1, 2010
0
#25
rigamagician wrote:
You can upload files directly to chess.com under Resources, Downloads, Add your download.
Thanks! I didn't know we could do this! The file is a zipped pgn file. I wrote a bit of a description on the download page.
http://www.chess.com/download/view/top-notch-kings-gambit-game-pgn
--Cystem
One of the reasons might be that KG is one of the oldest openings in chess. There is not much that is unknown about it. On the other hand, for us mortals, KG, and other sound and half sound gambits are pure firework. I tried it all, sicilian, french, QG (not really a gambit), and I got tired of long, positional, strategic games. I'm not Tigran Petrosian to make my opponent move back and forth with his rook 5 moves, cuz he has nothing to play, if anyone remember that game. And I got little tired of games, where early mistakes show up after 30 moves and decide who will win or lose game.
Jun 2, 2010
0
#27
Streptomicin wrote:
One of the reasons might be that KG is one of the oldest openings in chess. There is not much that is unknown about it. On the other hand, for us mortals, KG, and other sound and half sound gambits are pure firework.
Yes, I never worry when people say this or that opening has been refuted, or is unsound. I may choose to play an opening that has been "solved", but I'll never be up against anyone good enough to understand the "solution", so it won't matter.
As I've said before, I'd be perfectly happy to end up "only" as good as those old fuddy-dud players from 100 or 200 years ago, like Lasker, Morphy, Steinitz . . . 
Hammerslag ... it would be my pleasure I hav e abusy day today so I will post my findinglater :). I too love the Evans and played it for years but there are position equalling moves that can be played by black that refute the compensation of the gambit (off the top of my head I thnk its Morozevitch 2000 or 2001 and Steinitz
Jun 2, 2010
0
#29
My answer to the initial question:
"Because today's top GMs are in fact patzers compared to Chigorin, Spielmann, Bronstein or Spassky."
The fact is that Boris Spassky as champion checkmated the best computer in 18 moves without serious effort, while current top GMs aren't able to draw vs Rybka.
Thus - today top GMs are much weaker players than Spassky was and because KG is very skill-intensive, current GMs are unable to play it.
You may argue, you may disagree with me, but that is all you can do with that. 
Well, to be honest, computers in time of Spassky who could play chess, were big as a house...
Fiveofswords wrote:
Well concerning the opening with many modern GMS, I think many of them (not all) harm themselves by making incorrect assumptions via computer analysis.
Yeah, those dopey GMs always shooting themselves in the foot when it comes to logical thinking and chess, if only they'd listen...
go to youtube and type bbc mastergame. Then select Spassky - Karpov 2nd leg for a truely memorable KG game between the (then) world champion and the former world champion.
oozecube2 wrote:
Schachgeek, do you have an examples of master/gm games of them playing the King's gambit? And, do you have any ideas on the abovementioned game?
Thanks for your help on the main question, though
Spassky played the King´s gambit on occasion. Here are a few samples;
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chesscollection?cid=1007603
Hammerslag ... it would be my pleasure I hav e abusy day today so I will post my findinglater :). I too love the Evans and played it for years but there are position equalling moves that can be played by black that refute the compensation of the gambit (off the top of my head I thnk its Morozevitch 2000 or 2001 and Steinitz
more?
Bd6 option ... [White "Tigran L Petrosian"]
[Black "Antoaneta Stefanova"]
above notation is-[Event "Gibraltar"]
[Site "Gibraltar ENG"]
[Date "2008.01.24"]
I thought we were on a KG thread, not Evans?
tacticalforce wrote:
Bd6 option ... [White "Tigran L Petrosian"]
[Black "Antoaneta Stefanova"]
First of all, this is not the Tigran Petrosian the legend and former World Champion...just to clear that up.
The draws are not a big deal, but the loss on the 3rd game was loss in the endgame it looks like. The opening, like any opening can lose due to play from each side, the use of "refutation" of the opening by these examples is not justified. A few draws and a lose does not make an opening "refuted"; if you can show an opening that has 100% win I would be astonished.
I would appreciate some notes on the moves of the games that explains the "refutation" of b4 (gambit), showing that it "forces" a win or absolute draw for Black.
Lastly, let me say this...Fischer plays the Evan's and would play it against any GM if given the chance. He believed that is was sound and found no way for the gambit to be "absolutely" refuted; any opening with bad/inaccurate play can cause the opening to lose it's slight advantage.
Just about every notable attacking player in history has played the King's Gambit a few times :p.
As for the OP question about how to handle the knight... I generally don't waste a move playing h4 and if white plays the g4 advance I'll just castle and sac the knight on f3. See also, the muzio gambit :).
You can share files at filefactory.com, and post the link here.