My line in this one is exf5
The Bluestone Counter Gambit
hello any comments
It would be nice if you gave (at least) some of the variations you already have analysed.
I have 1 game, from 1860(!), dunno if it was posted in the other thread:
We have heavily analysed it in another thread, If I could get some people from that thread to help in this one, it would be appreciated.
the verdict is that it is playable
I am going to be nice and show some lines that were discussed in the other thread
All right, I'm here. For those that haven't seen the King's Gambit: Obscure Lines thread, I'm one of the major contributors of the Bluestone, along with jetfighter and melvinbluestone. I have a ton of the variations in the dxe5 lines. For now, because there is no real "gambit" in them, I'm going to call it the Bluestone Counter Gambit Declined, or the BCGD.
Bluestone: 1. e4 e5 2. f4 d5 3. d4 f5
BCGD: Bluestone + 4. dxe5 fxe4
BCGD Main Line: BCGD + 5. Nc3 Bb4 6. Bd2 c6 7. g3 Nh6 8. Bh3
Exchange Variation: BCGD Main + 8...Bxh3 9. Nxh3 Bxc3 10 Bxc3 O-O 11. Qd2 Nd7 12. O-O-O Qb6 (typically followed by 13. Bd4 Qa6)
Blockade Variation: BCGD Main + 8...Nf5 9. Bxf5 Bxf5 10. Qe2 h5
Knight's Stable Variation: Blockade + 11. Na4 Bg4 12. Qe3 a5
Poisoned Knight Variation: Knight's Stable + 13. Ne2 Nd7 14. O-O-O b5 15. Rde1 bxa4 16. a3
Jitterbug Variation: Knight's Stable + 13. Nc5
Poisoned Pawn Variation: Exchange + 14. Qc3
I highly reccomend all of you haters learning the Bluestone. It is very easy to transpose into, and plays a great game for both sides.
Here's an example of a transposition:
Oh, and jetfighter, if it's okay with you, I'm going to dub exf5 the BCGA (Bluestone Counter Gambit Accepted), because of how 5. fxe5 makes it an actual gambit.
does make sence now and maybe you should name the Bd3 variation The jetfighter folly
just look at fianchetto this' post
well then you can find some variations
well its just kind of following what the Falkbeer does, declines the Gambited Pawn
It is not a bad position, I am playing a game now in it, and have a central majority, and in a minute will have a lead in development
for Either side the symetrical timebomb is not bad
It does pretty much what the Falkbeer does, like jetfighter said. 1) it declines the gambit 2) it still gives black some "counter-attacking style" 3) after the gambit of 4. exf5 Bxf5 5. fxe5 black is in a very nice position with a minor piece out and a Qh5+ onslaught soon to come (very soon to come).
And your thing about the symmetrical position and how black's kingside is weak, it would be the same if he played 2...f5, and that's considered a very sound move.
here is a gambit within a gambit
well it isnt realy a gambit
Conzipe wrote:
To me the explanation of "it does what the falkbeer does, declines the gambit" is a pretty irrelevant fact, you can't evaluate the position based on that.
I have never heard of 2...f5 being considered a sound move, capturing the f-pawn is a big problem to deal with as black. Because again there is the duo threat of Qh5+ and capturing the e-pawn.
I know that the line 1. e4 e5 2. f4 d6 3. Nf3 f5!? has some potential but the important fact there is that black got rid of Qh5+ ideas before doing so.
Notice the constant problem always being the kingposition which makes the general rule I mentioned very fitting in these situation.
I'm coming late to this thread, even though the dubious line being discussed is my namesake. Anyway, Conzipe, I don't see why white's capturing the f5 pawn is a problem for black. I think this was covered in the other thread, but let's look at it again, considering the duo threats of Qh5+ and capturing the e-pawn....
Sorry, Conzipe. Just noticed your move 5.dxe5. True, black's down a pawn, but this is a gambit, for one side or the other. Black maybe OK after 5...c5:
Conzipe wrote:
Haven't you read any of my previous posts?
I have been keep saying that 5. dxe5 just wins a pawn for white. I even showed a diagram! I certainly hope that d is now clear enough to make you capture with the correct pawn. I feel so ignored.
5. fxe5? is a beginners mistake allowing the very common Qh4+ idea which pops up in a lot of openings.
" 5.fxe5 is a beginner's mistake....." Who said I'm not a beginner? That's why I didn't look at 5.dxe5!
This Idea was started in the Kings Gambit thread talking about obscure lines.
This move has never been found in a master level game, but we have come to the conclusion that it is even for both players, and is extremely tactical, and has some nice variations. I will not try to post them, only how to get to the position. Also if you can add some variations