I remember reading in a thread that Robert Fischer founded a tactic that made the Kings' Gambit look silly...
King's Gambit
Sort:
He did... yet most today think it is not a clear refutation. Bobby Fischer himself played the Kings Gambit even after his "Bust" of the King's Gambit.
I think Fischer could have refuted one line but the whole opening?
Fischer's defense is nowhere even near a refutation. It is the hardest line to play against, however. I used to play the KG but gave it up because it requires a lot of knowledge and a great all out attacking player to get a good position. The king's gambit vanished from high level play because people in those days people thought that attacking was the only way to go. Now people are too scared because there is a lot of theory and it is very risky.
batgirl wrote: The KG is alive and well. Don't believe everything you read.
I not saying that it is unaplayable but it is no longer seen at a high level
Batgirl has an excellent post (long and detailed) in another thread. Very good read on the King's Gambit. If I remember right, even some modern examples of grandmasters playing it. Perhaps someone nicer than myself (actually i'm out of time) can link to it. It's well worth the read.
Dec 9, 2007
0
#9
see Qxe8's comments and add the fact that "old players" played for different reasons. They played mostly as amateurs, for fun, not as a career, so losing and winning didn't carry such dire consequences. Also add that opening theory has grown exponentially since the Romantic Era. Most time is spend studying the intricacies of less explosive systems. Open games, as a rule, as seen less at high levels since one misstep in an open game is usually all it takes, while in closed games there's generally more room for error.
I've always liked this, from a lecture by David Bronstein:
"Bronstein played the first two moves of the King's gambit on the display board. 'This is what you should play,' he said. 'This is what you can learn about chess. Play for fun. Play the King's gambit.' As for openings popular with grandmasters, he said, 'They're boring. Look at this. Nowadays they play something like this.' He played out the first three or four moves of a Nimzo-Indian defense and an English opening. 'This is popular with the grandmasters. But it's boring.'"
Well...until I'm on the "master level" as people refer to it, I will play the King's Gambit!
King's Gambit is definitely an opening worth learning (and studying), as even if don't add it to your match repetoire, it's still a fantastic learning tool and, more importantly, EXTREMELY fun and is really where I feel the chess board coming to life in all its splendor.
Great responses people. I definately will give it a try.
according to MCO 11 it was the clock that pretty much removed the KG from tournament play.
1 e4 e5
2 f4
The King's Gambit.
I played the KIngs Gambit extensivly during the summer and had great results. Black usually hasnt done his homework or settles to lay the Falkbeer counter gambit which i found enjoyable to play as white. The Kings Gambit for me put weaker players to rest quickly while because i knew the theory well i always had good games with stronger opponents.
I wouldnt say the Kings Gambit is flawed in the sense that its unplayable savy_swede.
According to Robertie's "Winning Chess openings", "the king's gambit is an excellent choice for players who like unbalanced, wide-open positions with dangerous attacking chances for both sides..." I've been practicing this as a beginner/intermediate and I like the action of attacks and tactics rather than more closed, slower games that require "strategy and defense"-- which is more for advanced players.
I heard that the King's Gambit used to be the most popular opening in the old days. What flaws made it fall out of favor?