x
Chess - Play & Learn

Chess.com

FREE - In Google Play

FREE - in Win Phone Store

VIEW

Tennison Gambit

  • #1

    Hey all, just got interested in the Tennison Gambit and im wondering if anyone could give me some help with a few continuations. For those who dont know the Tennison Gambit is 1.nf3 d5 2.e4

    My favourite continuation is 2...dxe4 3. ng5 qd5 4. d3 exd3 5. bxd3 qxg2 6. be4 but i would like to find a few new lines so any help would be great.
    If anybody knows any lines that would be great thanks. Stavis.
  • #2

    3...Qd5 looks like a questionable move (bringing out the queen too early), and 5...Qxg2 looks suicidal.

    This is a sort of Budapest Gambit Reversed (it's normally 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 3.dxe5 Ng4). It should be an advantage for black that he hasn't played c7-c5 yet, since that's not a particularly useful move in the Budapest, on the contrary.

    So what about, say, 3...Nf6 4.Bc4 e6 ? I guess that if 3... Bf5, then 4.g4!? is interesting. Also Game Explorer suggests simply 3...e5 taking a stake in the center, must be fine too.

  • #3

    This gambit frequently arises from the scandinavian defense :  1 e4  d5   2 Nf3 dxe4  3 Ng5   and chess assistant gives 3.... e5 as scoring more than 70% for black so I dont believe in the gambit's soundness. black also scores better than 50% with 3.... Nf6  4 Bc4 e6.

  • #4

    I think when a gambit is scoring less than 40% its soundness has to be in doubt, especially when its white scoring less than 40%. ( ok, in the 3.... e5 line anyway )  I do believe though that Keres played this gambit some but geniuses of the game can get away with all sorts of stuff ....

  • #5

    Well, white's average rating was probably a lot lower as well, does Chess Assistant give the ratings?

  • #6

    i play this sometimes in blitz to catch people with

    1.Nf3 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Ng5 Nf6 4.d3 ed 5.Bxd3 + Nxf7+ Bg6+ +Qxd8

  • #7
    Scarblac wrote:

    Well, white's average rating was probably a lot lower as well, does Chess Assistant give the ratings?


     After a quick glance I only saw 2 games in this gambit in which either player was over 2500, one was Keres as white and he won the other was playing black and he drew against a much lower rated white player. In the games where the ratings are similar ( not more than 50 points different ) black is winning far more often than white and in games where there was a big rating difference with the lower rated winning, again black won more games than white. It does appear that the gambit is less sound than the kings gambit and didnt another thread here establish that the kings gambit is refuted ?  Wink

  • #8

    I have a friend ( also NM ) that only plays this gambit as white against the scandinavian, when I kid him about it he always throws in my face that " Keres played it!" and thats all he can say good about it apparently. However, did Keres play it much ?  I only saw one game with Keres playing it in Chess Assistant.

  • #9
    Reb wrote:

    I have a friend ( also NM ) that only plays this gambit as white against the scandinavian, when I kid him about it he always throws in my face that " Keres played it!" and thats all he can say good about it apparently. However, did Keres play it much ?  I only saw one game with Keres playing it in Chess Assistant.


     Must've been when Keres was young and played a ton of correspondence. He experimented a bunch then.

    I only see one example from Keres in megabase as well.

  • #10
    Gonnosuke wrote:
    goldendog wrote:
    Reb wrote:

    I have a friend ( also NM ) that only plays this gambit as white against the scandinavian, when I kid him about it he always throws in my face that " Keres played it!" and thats all he can say good about it apparently. However, did Keres play it much ?  I only saw one game with Keres playing it in Chess Assistant.


     Must've been when Keres was young and played a ton of correspondence. He experimented a bunch then.

    I only see one example from Keres in megabase as well.


    My correspondence database included a few more Keres games where he played the white side of the Tennison Gambit.  Here are the games I have:

    1-0 Keres,P-Feltveber/Estonia corr 1931
    1/2-1/2 Keres,P-Meyn,W/corr 1933
    0-1 Keres,P-Karu,A/corr 1931
    1-0 Keres,P-Luck,L/Tartu 1935/EXT 2001


     Thanks Gonnosuke. Apparently my database doesnt include corr games. ( Chess Assistant ) It only has the game with Luck,L which wasnt corr it seems.

  • #11

    I've only played this interesting gambit only once, but I played it wrong after dxe4 I played Nh4 is that even sound ?

  • #12

    I have been looking into playing this in serious over the board competition.  It is very easy in this line for black to error and get self checkmated.  You have to like sacrifices though!  This is just a superficial preview of my research.
  • #13

    I have a book on this opening which still seems to be available: Amazon.com

  • #14
    Reb wrote:
    Gonnosuke wrote:
    goldendog wrote:

     Must've been when Keres was young and played a ton of correspondence. He experimented a bunch then.

    I only see one example from Keres in megabase as well.


    My correspondence database included a few more Keres games where he played the white side of the Tennison Gambit.  Here are the games I have:

    1-0 Keres,P-Feltveber/Estonia corr 1931
    1/2-1/2 Keres,P-Meyn,W/corr 1933
    0-1 Keres,P-Karu,A/corr 1931
    1-0 Keres,P-Luck,L/Tartu 1935/EXT 2001


     Thanks Gonnosuke. Apparently my database doesnt include corr games. ( Chess Assistant ) It only has the game with Luck,L which wasnt corr it seems.


     

    For some reason correspondence games have never found their way into general databases.  With all the different sponsoring organizations out there, many just one man or woman operations, it's hard to accurately track all the games.

    So the correspondence DBs are sold separately, but it does seem fair to compensate those who had to actually track down all those games and enter them.

  • #15

    simply  3.... e5 and I prefer black already. 

  • #16

    My "Big DB 2007" in ChessBase 9 has over a 100 games with the Tennison Gambit and the percentages look OK for White, although I only glanced at the first few opening moves. There's probably a "spoiler" buried somewhere in the analysis tree consisting of a few,several or more lines with very good percentages - for Black

    Anyone who wants to play these obscure openings needs something like a current ChessBase "Big" or "Mega" DB with 3 or 4 million games to come up with a decent sampling and/or they need to invest in a book specifically about the obscure opening of their choice. Or they can learn the hard way...

  • #17

    3 .. e5 is a simple solution ?  This is a simple statement, only based on general rules.  You never played this position, so how can you judge ?

    I confess I often played 4.d3  hoping for exd with nice gambitplay. But 4.h4 is generally regarded as White's best reply and analyses show no disadvantages to Black.

  • #18
    gambitlover wrote:

    3 .. e5 is a simple solution ?  This is a simple statement, only based on general rules.  You never played this position, so how can you judge ?

    I confess I often played 4.d3  hoping for exd with nice gambitplay. But 4.h4 is generally regarded as White's best reply and analyses show no disadvantages to Black.


    The idea that a strong player cant judge a position simply because he has not played the position is rather silly, especially coming from a high rated player. All I am claiming is that I believe black is at least equal after 3... e5 and if I had to play this position for one side or the other I would prefer to play black. I only found 4 games with 4 h4 and the highest rated player in any of these games was under 2100. I would play 4...h6 and after 5 Nxe4 Nf6 and black has no real problems imo. 

  • #19
    Conzipe wrote:

    So I really have to play a chess position before I can actually judge it?

    Suddenly analyzing and exploring openings became rather pointless as you won't be able to judge any of the positions arising anyway without playing them first.


    You look at that position and you say Black is better.  I look at the same position and I say that's not true.

    So who of us is right ?  

    But the player who has had this position on the board several times can talk out of his experience .  He has tried out several lines with good or bad result and knows what can happens.

  • #20
    Reb wrote:

    All I am claiming is that I believe black is at least equal after 3... e5 and if I had to play this position for one side or the other I would prefer to play black. I only found 4 games with 4 h4 and the highest rated player in any of these games was under 2100. I would play 4...h6 and after 5 Nxe4 Nf6 and black has no real problems imo. 


    After 4.h4  main lines are 4. .. Nc6 and 4. .. Be7

    Played alternatives are 4. .. h6  4. .. Nf6?  4. .. f5?  4. .. Bf5

    4. .. h6 5.Nxe4 Be6 6.d3 Qd7 ( or 6.Nbc3 Nf6) is the main line

    After 5. .. Nf6, you are right, Black has no problems. Nor has White. So whats wrong with playing the Tennisson ? Is White better after playing the main line of the Spanish ?

Online Now