The Danish Gambit

I can think quite fine, I just enjoy more to think about tactical puzzles rather than the nuances and inaccuracies of some very long computer opening analysis gobledegook that no one is going to play because it's impractical to do so.

What suggests the "5...Bb4+ refutation"  is a practical problem worthy of thought? The three stem games won by White? If something isn't a practical problem then it's not worth thinking about. As an example, theoretically a giant meteor could hit the earth and kill us all, but since it's not a practical problem, it would be pretty stupid to dwell on it wouldn't it? Probably our time would be best spent thinking about other things that are actually relevant.

Though I'd wager I have thought about your posted analysis more than most of the Black 1...e5 players who just skimmed over it and automatically came to the conclusion "this is a true refutation because a guy with "IM" by his name said so." and if you asked them today, wouldn't remember anything from it aside from "play 5...Bb4+"

You don't have to try more than that. You have persuaded me that you are totally clueless.

Of course this fact alone does not exclude your possible ultimate authority in chess, but you do have to set your own ruleset first.

the Danish and the Middle Gambit is the same thing

Ah, I have to reply again because you went back and edited your post to include this

"It's like saying that "the Danish is losing, but it's a great opening, because I always play against patzers, which always lose"."

It's more like saying "The Danish is a good opening for club level" I play it against equal and greater opposition, (my opponent rating is lower than mine only because chess.com suddenly inflated my rating by 300 points), and in fact some of the highest rated opponents I've beaten I've beaten them with the Danish Gambit. More importantly, it's a good opening for overall improvement. I may be clueless, but by playing the Danish Gambit I hope to get a little less clueless in regards to the fundamentals of chess, in particular using the initiative and attacking which before I played the Danish I was bad at. I've improved in these areas and also seen that my improved skill using the initiative is carrying over into other games that aren't Danish Gambits.

By the way Pfren, I've seen some of your games and you make mistakes like the rest of us. Like that time you were playing the Sicilian defense against 2.Bc4 and your opponent got a winning position, and now you go around saying "2.Bc4 can be deadly". If Jacques Mieses or Frank Marshall were alive today I bet they would beat you with the Danish Gambit.

I guess it depends on the level of player.  Less than a week of going over some lines and ideas (given by Pfren) was enough that the last 2 times I faced the danish in blitz I won convincingly (I used to struggle). 

I don't know why that's a psychological victory.  Recently I had to do similar work to help give me ideas against the boring and solid philidor.  That's just how chess works sometimes.  Luckily it doesn't take much homework to go from knowing nothing to being somewhat competent.

You mean 4...Bb4 without the "+" since the c-pawn is in the way? You're referring to this right  1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Bc4 Bb4? After this I always just go 5. Bxf7 Kxf7 6. Qb3+ and now Black's King is stuck out there with opposite colored bishops on the board. Also I've found you shouldn't trust computer analysis so much in playing the gambit, because if Black is better by say -.7 yet they're ahead by a whole pawn, that means their position is bad.

@Shellknight Who's to say you wouldn't have won those games without reading the article.? Anyway, if you can honestly recite those entire lines against 5.Nbd2 5.Nc3 and 5.Kf1 then congratulations. Like I said I tried to use those lines against a computer and got crushed, so yeah probably does depend on the level of player more than just following what Pfren's blog said.

Well that's even worse for Black, now they've only got the -.7 advantage but are up a whole two pawns.

My opponents seemed unsure what to do pretty early, so they fell apart.  I wasn't playing danish "experts" (so to speak).

But yes, I usually lost or at least struggled (I'd accept even two pawns and just trust myself to solve the difficulties on my own).  I don't remember all the lines... but it's a start!

The only holes you can find are the ones in your pants, sir.

White isn't better out of any variations against the Danish. It's just that black needs to watch his step.

Bros I think you need this video to Understand better Danish Gambit . URL: https://youtu.be/bOQFp291L2A?si=WRJUk2SitolxY1ZE