Also a lot of players who come across the Blackeburne-Shilling for the first time fall for it.
New Refutation Trap For the Blackburne-Shilling Gambit
Sort:
Feb 3, 2021
0
#43
rychessmaster1 wrote:
BlackLawliet wrote:
Any other feedback?
What point is there in refuting an opening that already sucks
I also want to thank you for commenting. It's cool to have an NM comment on my forum about a trap I made.
Feb 4, 2021
0
#46
rychessmaster1 wrote:
There is also a better way to refute it
1. d4
haha, nice
Feb 4, 2021
0
#47
rychessmaster1 wrote:
There is also a better way to refute it
1. d4
Change my mind: The best opening has to be a3. How can they use a trap on you if you play a3?
Feb 4, 2021
0
#48
BlackLawliet wrote:
rychessmaster1 wrote:
There is also a better way to refute it
1. d4
Change my mind: The best opening has to be a3. How can they use a trap on you if you play a3?
a5 perhaps?
Feb 4, 2021
0
#49
rychessmaster1 wrote:
BlackLawliet wrote:
rychessmaster1 wrote:
There is also a better way to refute it
1. d4
Change my mind: The best opening has to be a3. How can they use a trap on you if you play a3?
a5 perhaps?
I guess that's true. Maybe a4 is better.
It's a good trap, but not in the book. The reason it isn't in the book is you can't attack the knight on c6 with b5 when the knight is already on d4. You can fianchetto the bishop, but there should be other ways to develop it. So it close to wastes a move if your opponent does not fall for the trap.
Feb 4, 2021
0
#52
morphy1023 wrote:
It's a good trap, but not in the book. The reason it isn't in the book is you can't attack the knight on c6 with b5 when the knight is already on d4. You can fianchetto the bishop, but there should be other ways to develop it. So it close to wastes a move if your opponent does not fall for the trap.
There are some book moves which are a lot worse than this. I mean, if the Damiano Defense is a book opening then this should be able to be one as well, since the Damiano leads to a huge disadvantage right off the get-go.
Feb 4, 2021
0
#53
BlackLawliet wrote:
BlackLawliet wrote:
AunTheKnight wrote:
If they don’t capture, would white be okay?
Good question! Yes, white would be perfectly fine. You could develop your bishop to the B2 square and have a very good bishop pair. But I can a sure you; in 9 out of ten cases, they will take the pawn. I've played something like 5 games with it and 100% of the time my opponent has fallen for it.
For example:
In this position white has a big lead in development, a powerful bishop pair, and black's dark-squared bishop is locked behind the d-pawn which is defending the e-pawn.
Okay. Interesting.
Feb 4, 2021
0
#54
AunTheKnight wrote:
BlackLawliet wrote:
BlackLawliet wrote:
AunTheKnight wrote:
If they don’t capture, would white be okay?
Good question! Yes, white would be perfectly fine. You could develop your bishop to the B2 square and have a very good bishop pair. But I can a sure you; in 9 out of ten cases, they will take the pawn. I've played something like 5 games with it and 100% of the time my opponent has fallen for it.
For example:
In this position white has a big lead in development, a powerful bishop pair, and black's dark-squared bishop is locked behind the d-pawn which is defending the e-pawn.
Okay. Interesting.
Thankyou! Please post it on this forum if you ever use it!
BlackLawliet wrote:
There are some book moves which are a lot worse than this. I mean, if the Damiano Defense is a book opening then this should be able to be one as well, since the Damiano leads to a huge disadvantage right off the get-go.
Yes, it is way better than Diamiano's Defense. It is what as known as an unsound trap, but it can be effective if opponents fall for it enough.
Feb 4, 2021
0
#56
morphy1023 wrote:
BlackLawliet wrote:
There are some book moves which are a lot worse than this. I mean, if the Damiano Defense is a book opening then this should be able to be one as well, since the Damiano leads to a huge disadvantage right off the get-go.
Yes, it is way better than Diamiano's Defense. It is what as known as an unsound trap, but it can be effective if opponents fall for it enough.
I see.
Feb 7, 2021
0
#57
Any other feedback?
What point is there in refuting an opening that already sucks
Haha, I can understand why you would think this at your level when the Blackburne-Shilling gambit is probably irrelevant, but at my level where it's played semi-often, this is just a good way to "beat" black within the first 10 moves.