I played a line commonly given as a refutation (one mentioned by GM Larry Kaufmann) against RosarioVampire and was whipped thoroughly. It is a tough gambit to face. That, and I'm not of the caliber to refute it.
The Halloween Gambit
Sort:
gambitlover wrote:
Mani_B wrote:
On the 3rd board u said that after Qe7 I can try things like Ba3 right?
Well wat happens after Qxa3 Qxf7+ Kd8
Now I dont see a really gr8 way for white to continue contrasting with the number of pieces he has sacked.
Can u plz explain...
Sorry, but in this position, ( after 9. .. Qe7 ) playing Ba3 is not the right idea.
Main line is 10.0-0 after which black has several possibilities, but only one good move.
10.h4 can also be played.
Right, Ba3 was my mistake. You shouldn't play that due to no follow up. 0-0 is the main line after that.
Trust gambitlover. He definitely knows how to play the Halloween gambit!
One surprising option for Black is 4. ... Nxe5 5. d4 Nc6 6. d5 Bb4 7. dxc6 bxc6= transposing to the main line of the Scotch Four Knights Game (compare 4. d4 exd4 5. Nxd4 Bb4 6. Nxc6 bxc6).
Now we see if White knows his theory 
.
Theoretically the Scotch Four Knights is so wimpy for White it makes its Spanish cousin look like a cutting edge opening by comparison.
There's a great .pdf file for it at:
http://www.chessville.com/UCO/Halloween_Gambit/UON13HalloweenGambit.pdf
Analyzes lots of lines in the opening, gives advice on how to meet it, etc... good luck, it's tough!
Apr 16, 2009
0
#27
EDIT: I've deleted this post since it turns out asking for advice about an ongoing game violates the rules. I didn't think asking for advice about an opening was any different than seeking advice from an openings book, but if its a violation of the rules, then I won't do it.
The .pdf suggests Qe2!, and says that 8... Qe7 was bad.
But after Qe2, you merely win a knight at the expense of 2 pawns. Sure, you wreck black's pawn structure, and you're able to castle king-side, but to me - doesn't seem really game-breaking. Is there a better response?
Apr 16, 2009
0
#29
i was thinking Qe2 as well for a response. I'm curious what others here would do.
I'm going ahead with Qe2. hope its not a tactical error. LOL!
Becareful rationalredneck for if the game is on going on CC, it's against the rules to seek out side help!
Apr 17, 2009
0
#31
Qe4!!
Come on guys.
The game is ongoing - so no help should be given.
This isn't vote chess.
Manchero is completely right, you should not discuss a game that is still in progress on this site.
Apr 17, 2009
0
#33
oh sorry. didn't know. okay after the game I'll post it for folks to analyze.
Jun 22, 2009
0
#34
Gonnosuke wrote:
mhtraylor wrote:
I played a line commonly given as a refutation (one mentioned by GM Larry Kaufmann) against RosarioVampire and was whipped thoroughly. It is a tough gambit to face. That, and I'm not of the caliber to refute it.
I believe the line you're referring to is the Hans Berliner "refutation".
Kaufman's "refutation" goes 4...Nxe5 5.d4 Nc6 6.d5 Bb4 7.dxc6 Nxe4 8.Qd4. Berliner's "refutation" goes 5...Ng6 6.e5 Ng8 7.Bc4 d5 8.Bxd5 c6 9.Bb3. The foremost expert on the Halloween, Dutch IM Maurits Wind, doesn't play either of these lines as black, and in both cases, the statistics seem to favour white. Those looking for a refutation would probably do better to look elsewhere.
I was shoked when found this gambit. It looking incredible. I play chess a long time but never seen this gambit before.
I has created new thematic tournament for halloween gambit. All people which like this gambit - you are welcome: http://www.chess.com/tournament/halloween-gambit8
PS. Sorry if I posted in the wrong topic. Just let me know and I'll remove my message.
Aug 3, 2009
0
#37
I used to have my engine play this a lot against Net users - it was a real hoot! The bot never lost with it, but it came close a few times. It is definitely a sharp opening that will put some flare in the game hehe.
:)
If anyone has a game where they have played this opening and had an interesting game, doesn't matter if you lost won or tied, feel free to post it here so everyone can take a look and discuss!
-einstein2191
This oppening is very different from what i'm used to. The next time the four knights comes up in one of my blitz games, i'll use this. But this won't be very useful in slow games cause the opponent will probably be able to calculate all the variations(im talking G/90 and above, anything less and the opponent will probably get into time trouble).
chirp55 wrote:
This oppening is very different from what i'm used to. The next time the four knights comes up in one of my blitz games, i'll use this. But this won't be very useful in slow games cause the opponent will probably be able to calculate all the variations(im talking G/90 and above, anything less and the opponent will probably get into time trouble).
Though it is true that giving the opponent more time to think about the moves will give him/her a less chance of making a mistake, part of defeating this gambit is knowing enough opening theory to counteract it. Defending against this gambit requires an un-logical way of thinking for part of it and no matter how much time is spent on a move, if you don't know what you're doing it won't matter.
my win rate as white with this opening is..97%
no, seriously. i played this opening as white exclusively. it's not easy to refute.