Here, I'll answer all your questions, and the ball will be in your court.

First off, we are talking 1.e4 e5 2.f4 Nc6.  What Marin prefers for Black after 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 means less than the taste of your mother's toe nail!

So taking Marin out of the picture, your claim is that Shaw loves 3.Nf3 so much after 1.e4 e5 2.f4 Nc6.  As a statistician, I am well aware of "bad data" and "valid sample sizes".  Trying to use games here in a database filled with games by nobodies doesn't do you any good.  So using a valid database that only includes high quality games, and still has a sample size of 30 or more (30 is necessary to deem a "valid sample size"), let's take a look at www.newinchess.com, a site that only includes high quality games, and has more than 30 of the line in question.  Following the line KG 5.1.6, and then going 3.Nf3 f5!!, Black scores 60.5% across 67 games (35 wins, 21 losses, 11 draws).  Continuing down the main line, 4.exf5 e4 5.Ne5, Black has

A) 5...Nf6!
B) 5...Nxe5

In line A, the better of the two, Black has nothing better than 6.d3, and after 6...Qe7, White has yet to survive.  It's been played 3 times between 1999 and 2006, and I wonder why it hasn't been played since?  hmmmmm...

As for the Vienna Game, by Transposition, the opening itself is mere equality, but you play a bunch of the ditzes that play here, and you'll have a clear psychological advantage (+/-).  Don't try to do this in the Open section of a large event like the World Open.

To begin with, I do not advocate the King's Gambit at all for White, and have about the same respect for it that I do the Benko Gambit and Alekhine for Black, which are both ZERO!  Of all the "normal" openings, these are the worst 3 you can play!

Case in point:

This is just one of many Alekhine's I've blown out of the water.  Another in an over the board event at the Continental Class Championship, Black gets blown out!

I'm not some little patzer.  I have legit reasons when I say a line is bad (i.e. King's Gambit for White, Alekhine and Benko for Black).  Unlike many other airheads on this site, and Fischer (see "French Winawer"), I don't just knock an opening because I don't like it (i.e. Najdorf Sicilian - I bow to the Najdorf Sicilian, it has me beat - I can't beat it with White, I can't play it and survive with Black).  I knock it because I beat it repeatedly!  And in the case of the topic of this post, beating the King's Gambit is not done via 1.e4 e5 2.f4 Nc6.  You let White off the hook, and after 3.Nc3!, White has regained equality, which is a moral victory after such a stupid second move!

I like to play French defense ( 1.e4 e6) or if you want play 1.e4 e5 2. Nf3 I like to play Nf6, Russian game.

Optimissed,

I have just the answer for you in the Benko Gambit.  Do some heavy theoretical studying of the Fianchetto Variation, and say to hell with the rest of it.  It involves White understanding the reason behind a few odd moves that almost look like White is cramping himself, but once you see what's going on, you'll realize how powerful the Fianchetto line is against the Benko Gambit.  Now keep in mind White's idea.  He's trying to either hold the extra pawn, or else give it back for favorable circumstances.  This is not a "Blow the Black King out of the water" attack.  Many wins for White come in the form of an endgame.  But I still have yet to be convinced that Black can equalize at all in this opening.

It may not have the level of tactics that say, the Najdorf or Dragon Sicilian have, but I don't look at an opening as good or bad based on tactics or positional play.  I've played the Slav before, and I vividly remember a game where my opponent played the gambit line 5.e4, and it was one of the wildest, most tactical games I've played in the last 5 years, and I won.  I've also played a practically "tacticless" game in the Berlin Defense about 3 years ago, and won that one too by getting my King to c6 and slowly crushing White in a superior minor piece plus one rook game.

With White, I've gone everywhere from tactical lines like the deferred Wing Gambit against the Sicilian (1.e4 c5 2.a3 Nc6 3.b4) to the static Colle Koltanowski.  If it's a legit opening not called the London System or Barry Attack, I've probably played it from the White side at some point or another.

You sound like one of those, based on your comment about the Benko, that is dissatisfied if the game isn't wild and crazy.  If you want to improve on your game, I'd highly recommend playing both positional and tactical openings, and not being biased saying it must be positional or tactical based on the opening name, and that some positional openings end up tactical and some tactical openings end up positional at times.

@ ThrillerFan:

Nothing against you but: Are you a noob? What trash are you talking? You cant say openings are bad just because you dont like them! The alekhine defence is a very normal opening which isnt refuted somehow. Also the lines about the Kingsgambit with e4 e5, f4 Nc6... I can just shake my head. This is a very normal line and definetly not a bad one so what are you talking about? Maybe you can explain it to me, I dont understand it.

Can we stay on topic please? 

Thank you...

You're an idiot!  I don't base how good or bad an opening is based on whether or not I like the opening.  I base it on CONSISTENT BASHING AGAINST HIGHER RATED OPPONENTS, i.e. MASTERS, OVER THE BOARD!

I "hate" the Najdorf.  I can't beat it.  I can't play it right.  It has me stumped.  I bow to the Najdorf, not talk trash about it.

The Benko Gambit I have consistently bashed with the Fianchetto Variation, with the rare non-wins being draws.

The Alekhine I have consistently bashed with the Classical (4.Nf3)

The King's Gambit I have consistently bashed with both the Classical Declined (2...Bc5) AND the Modern Accepted (3...d5 after accepting the Gambit).

I'm not stupid enough to base trash talk about an opening on whether I "like" it or not.  London is Boring.  I hate the Najdorf and Dragon.  So what?  Who cares?  The Benko, Alekhine, and King's Gambit are the only 3 I'll trash talk about because quite frankly, I bash them from the opposite side!  They are unsound!

The OP has asked for assistance on two positions and none of the trivial opening discussion or ridiculous arguments are relevant to them in any way. 

If you want to talk about other openings then make other threads. Otherwise you are spamming and being generally unhelpful.

The one and only unsound thing I can see here is your mental health. Regards.

This is an interesting thread. Particularly KIngs Gambit discussion. Pity there has to be a bit of nastiness creeping into it. I often wonder if people were in the same room , would they be brave enough ...

Anyway. @Thrillerfan, perhaps you could start a thread or two on the Alekhine and Benko, perhaps giving a couple of your games, opening the discussion up. (I'm developing these as second string openings so am interested )

@ThrillerFan:

You have real problems... Please stop trash talk. Would be very nice of you :)

P.s.: Nakamura is surely playing the kings gambit because it is absolutely shit... Sounds very realistic ( NOT!!!)

It isn't. I play it pretty frequently at official correspondence games (engine usage allowed) and so far I have not met ANY sort of refutation.

Depending on the definition of "sound" (some people say for white unsound is giving black equality, according to that logic even the Ruy Lopez Berlin Wall or nearly any Ruy Lopez for that matter and Najdorf, two of the absolute best plays in chess from both sides are "unsound" since black can equalize no matter what eventually) the King's Gambit is, have to agree with you about the Alekhine and Benko, trashing them is silly.  The King's Gambit black has many more playable permuations and white needs to be more careful to obtain his draw.  He may have enough initiative to enter an even material equal endgame, or black may hold the pawn and enter an equal endgame down a pawn where white, yet again has more chances of going wrong.  In other words one might have to be a top notch software and computer to consistently draw the king's gambit, not exactly practical for white.  I personally won with it back in the day, but gave it up since reading about Fischer's Bust (I don't care that it was written long before I was born, he's an all time great along with Kasparov and Carlsen) and a coach saying it's not really my style (I had to strain trying to make it work). 

I think it was either Lipnitsky or Nimzowitsch who stated that 1.e4,Nf6 was a brilliant play from Alekhine because it was objectively sound despite not seeming to conform to the principles of the time.  White's big center becomes an object of attack since black has pressure and development, so white's 1.e4,Nf6 2.e5,Nd5 3.d4,d6 4.Nf3! seems best to me.  Now, Steinitz and Tarrasch deserve some respect, but not too much where one would in turn disrespect 1.e4,Nf6!? 

"It isn't. I play it pretty frequently at official correspondence games (engine usage allowed) and so far I have not met ANY sort of refutation."

It's actual one of the best gambits there are, being in an elite list of playable gambits.  The Smith-Morra (maybe?), Tal Gambit (especially), Evan's, Lightning Gambit Accepted (my invention, which is actually an advantage for black against the Bird Wing, which is a hybrid between Bird's Opening and the Wing Gambit after 1.f4?!,c5 2.b4,cxb4 3.a3,e5! 4.fxe5,d6 5.exd6?,Bxd6) and From are just about the only sound gambits left. 

Players who are playing the Kingsgambit are definetly not playing for a draw! I want to see you guys defend with black against it in a real OTB game. You just speak theoretically, but nobody plays perfect and if it would be so easy to equalize for black in every opening, we wouldnt have so many wins for white in the game of chess.

I need a new opening for black

Maybe invint one ?

Just study openings.  If you are black you can't control opening, white gets the initiative.  You need an opening for every possible 1st-3rd or more move.  Or you can just see if you can find a good move.

P.S.  Good luck.

What about sicilian dragon for my rating?

I tried few openings,this one seems good for me because I'm trying  to play a little more aggressive.

I tried normal dragon variation on fritz,had good results.Even better then french I played one time.Your O'Kelly is interesting,but pawns are little complicated in the beginning.

If the original poster is still paying attnetion. The Philidor is not something that at his current level is necessaily a cause for concern, but as he gets better the spatial defiencies of the Philidor may become apparent - BUT I don't believe that for MOST players this is important.

White has to be a good player to convert a spatial advantage from this opening - not withstanding the tactical strokes available to both sides as the game progresses. Long term ambition and success might warrant, if sticking with 1e4 e5, playing Nc6 after Nf3.

For me is good for opening,easy to learn and analysis.I have bunch of things in head,so I have no idea what to use and what to play.

What??