The Gibbins Weidenhagen Gambit
Sort:
Yeah, it's a fun opening.
A few years ago I played this against ex South African champ Albert Ponelis in a club championship game (I was gonna lose anyway :)). I misplayed a favourable middlegame and lost. But he was quite impressed by the position I found myself in. Sadly I'm not very good at keeping my games....
There were 2 books written on the GWG and both books were in German.
The first book covered theory and also had some games. The second book
had all games. Maybe over 500 games. Both books are no longer in print.
And I used to have a copy of the first book. You can find the games in the
files section of the Yahoo Unorthodox Openings Newsgroup. You would
have to register to access the discussion on this gambit and also the files
posted. There are well over a thousand games in that cbv file.
Before the name was fully established, one of the writers of the first book asked me for a name. I did suggest Bogart Gambit, however the publisher did not agree to this name and instead named the opening the Gibbins Weidenhagen Gambit.
Since that time I have explored other gambits such as the Omega
Gambit 1.d4 Nf6 2.e4 and also the English Weidenhagen Gambit 1.c4
Nf6 g4. There are now many different Omega Gambits that I had
created and explored. I had written articles for these gambits at
Chessville. However Chessville no longer exists.
Best Regards
DarthMusashi
Roopert wrote:
Yeah, it's a fun opening.
A few years ago I played this against ex South African champ Albert Ponelis in a club championship game (I was gonna lose anyway :)). I misplayed a favourable middlegame and lost. But he was quite impressed by the position I found myself in. Sadly I'm not very good at keeping my games....
I do agree it is a fun opening to play , however it is too bad you did not keep
a score of the game you played.
Best Regards
DarthMusashi
Apr 26, 2013
0
#17
Unfortunately in my study I learned that Black can grab the advantage with 2...Nxg4 3.e4 d5! 4.Be2 Nf6 5.e5 Nfd7 where 6.e6 doesn't give White enough compensation for the two pawns after 6...fxe6 planning Ndf6 and 6.Nf3 Nb6 also shows Black developing comfortably.
It's playable, but not a serious try for opening advantage. I think White lacks sufficient compensation and therefore Black has a very slight advantage.
Apr 26, 2013
0
#18
In the above game in this line Black's 12...Nxg3? looks terrible, instead I would prefer 12...g6 allowing 13.Ng5 Qd7 14.Nxe6 Kf7! where despite the awkwardly placed Black king I see no way for White to proceed in an attack.
Earlier I reject 7.Bd3 because of 7...g6 8.h4 e5! where the complications seem to favor Black, e.g. 9.h5 e4! 10.hxg6 exd3 11.Rxh7 Rg8 12.g7 Nf6 13.gxf8=Q+ Rxf8 where Black is clearly better.
8.Qg4 Bg7 is also sufficient, as is 8.Nf3 c5 where in all cases White doesn't have nearly enough for two pawns. Maybe White has compensation for one pawn and might win the e6 pawn, but I strongly prefer Black in these positions.
You right that in that game it was not clear that White had a won game,
However the only reason for Whte's win is that Black lost on time.
Best Regards
Clyde Nakamura
The Gibbins-Weidenhagen Gambit by Clyde Nakamura
Note: In 1996 I had written a chess article called The Gibbins-Weidenhagen Gambit for Chess Horizons which is a New England Chess Publication. See article below:
Best Regards
DarthMusashi
In early 1982 I had discovered an amazing gambit in one of my blitz games with Malcolm Kirkpatrick. I did not know what to name it. Therefore I used a combined name of another familiar opening, the Grob's Attack. It was thus named the Queens Pawn Grob. My first actual game with this opening did not occur til my 2 game match with Reynolds Takata in 1982.
It was not until I had written a letter to Hugh E. Myers of Myers Opening's Bulletin, that I had discovered that the Queen's Pawn Grob had been played much earlier by other players and Masters dating to the 1930's with Humphrey Bogart's game and to Bronstein's game during the 1950's. It was also known as the "Bullfrog" and "Weidenhagen Gambit".
This gambit is very transpositional in nature. It could easily transpose into a number of other openings such as a form of the Budapest Defense, Alekhine's defense, Sicilian Defense and etc.
The opening moves are 1. d4 Nf6 2. g4!
The move 2. g4 tends to disrupt Black's normal development. If black declines the gambit with 2...d5 then 3. g5 can be very troublesome. In some lines white gets play on the half open g-file with Rg1. If Black captures the g-pawn with 2...Nxg4 White picks up 2 tempi and a long lasting strategic attack. Like most other gambits White gets good control of the center, good development of his pieces and a strong center. Black may have to defend throughout most of the game.
One of the most interesting ideas that has been tried against the Gibbins-Weidenhagen Gambit has been Oshima's line (1.d4 Nf6 2. g4 e5).
This is a form of the Budapest Gambit. This was first played by Oshima against me in 1985. And also in 1986 where Oshima had analyzed this line extensively but was still busted over the board in 1986. Black gets good development and counterplay for his e5 gambit pawn.It has taken me a long time to fully realize that the Gibbins-Weidenhagen Gambit is not a true Queen's Pawn opening. A good majority of the games lead to king pawn positions. This is the very reason that the gambit is so potent.
Games:
Bogart, Humphrey - NN 1-0
Deimer, E - NN 1-0
Bronstein, D - Simagin Line
Nakamura, C - Takata, Reynolds 1-0
Nakamura, C - Vasquez, Enrique 1-0
Druke, Volker - Becker 1-0
Nakamura, C - Tsoy, Victor 1-0
Nakamura, C - Osima, Daniel 1-0
Nakamura, C - Rubsamen, Rogelio 1-0
Nakamura, C - Felber, Joseph 1-0