The Gibbins Weidenhagen Gambit

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #41


    BigGStikman hat geschrieben:
    schlechter55 wrote:

    I have to be more explicit now. The analysis given by stikman and few others ignores to a large extent the black responses.


    I wish to challenge all players who believe that White would have a good game in the gambit.

    3 days per move, 1.d4 Nf6, 2.g4 Nxg4, and I have Black.

    I only analyzed my own games I've played yet. More will follow (at the moment I'm busy with the analysis of two other GWG games). At this stage I'm in a learning proces.


    I would like to take you up for a challenge with the GWG. Maybe you can learn me something .

    Hey BigG...thats the point...everyone of us is in a learning process dealing with this gambit (you remember our both GWG-battles...both quickly won by white Cool) and i think its really helpful, if a good and sceptical player liker schlechter55 joins us in analyzing the possibilties for both sides.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #42


    @Dark_Falcon: That's why I play schlechter55 at the moment with a GWG on the board Laughing.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #43


    Super article!!

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #44


    The first analyzed GWG game between Dark_Falcon and me. It's an interesting game where black played 2...e5 (Oshima Variation).

    The complete text of the analysis of the game (click here).

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #45


    And the other game between Dark_Falcon and me ...

    The complete text of the analysis of the game (click here).

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #46


    Very interesting. For blitz it is definitely a good weapon. For longer games I am not that sure, but if the Evan's gambit is good this must be good as well.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #47


    @csalami10: I only play correspondence (long) games, and GWG works for me (even at 2000+) Wink.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #49


    Whoever is willing to take the white pieces after 1.d4 Nf6 2.g4 (?) Nxg4 3.e4 d6 4.Be2 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5 (variant from #45 which is not mentioned) is very courageous. If White trades pawns and queens, his development advantage consists of having played Bf1-Be2 and g2-out of the board at the cost of a pawn, hardly impressive compensation. If 6.d5 White loses any central initiative he may have had. Otherwise Black trades himself on d4 and plays ...Nc6 etc. with an easy development.

    I would be much more afraid of meeting the Budapest than this "gambit".


    I mean, it's less awful than it seems, but there is still a good margin before being even remotely playable at 2000+ level, long games.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #50


    pfren hat geschrieben:
    BigGStikman wrote:

    @csalami10: I only play correspondence (long) games, and GWG works for me (even at 2000+) .

    2000 - over, or below zero?

    another senseless and respectless post from the bearded greek will never learn how to behave.

  • 3 years ago · Quote · #51


    @Irontiger: Perhaps the GWG doesn't suit everybody, but some find it intriguing enough to play it Wink. There's nothing wrong with the Budapest Gambit (I play it myself), but others can't related to that either. Most important is that you play your own style of chess. There's no right or wrong, just an enjoyable game of chess Laughing.

  • 2 years ago · Quote · #52


    What about in GWG if 3. f3 and then black plays this? Drunken Knight Countergambit: 3.-e5!?4.fxg4 Dh4+ 5.Kd2 exd4 6.Rf3 Dxg4 7.Tg1 De4 8.Ke1 Rc6 9.c3 

Back to Top

Post your reply: