It is really bad to play wing gambits
The wing gambit vs the smith morra gambit
Sort:
I hated playing against Sicilian when younger, but played a variation between these two and played b4 then c3. All my games I remember, it was accepted and threw the opponent away from a standard sicilian (giving me an advantage). Not sure if its a proper opening though as cannot find it.
1. e4,c5 2. b4, c5xb4 3. c3, b4xc3 4. Nxc3...
I' ve studied the Morra enough to have a general idea (based on Evans' game vs Ken Smith) what to do against it. So far, the general idea has been enough to win a pawn up endgame in time.
The wing gambit looks so bad to me I've never felt the need to study it. (I guess this means I'll lose to it soon so I should have at least 1 look.) - Bill
When I played the Sicilian I used to hate facing the Smith-Morra. I preferred to decline it, but I wasn't that keen on playing the Black side of an Alapin either. I did look at supposed refutations of the accepted side of the gambit, but they were very complicated and hard to remember, and I was sure I'd be caught by surprise by an unexpected White deviation. It seems a very natural line for an attacking player of White, even if it's unsound against the best defence. Whereas the Wing gambit just seems bad to me.
i HATED wing gambit and am MARRIED to smith morra, even if you can't just play Qe2/Rd1/Rc1 and wait for your opportunity to pounce anymore.
it's a maze of transpositions now, but if you study it, it's still brutal. i've been studying the "main line" knight sac, and it can lead to very quick mates. none of my opponents have played into what i've studied so far though
just as in the french, i personally hate decl;ining smith morra with the franco sicilian. i don't do positional. i hate it from ANY move order
Jan 18, 2023
0
#7
Both are quite bad to me. Wing is more creative but easily is shoved aside of potential while Smith-Morra while more solid is a lame cop-out for those who don't want to appreciate the beauty of 2. Nf3 and then they come to complain that 2. b4 is so terrible.
so far, I'm 47% wins to just 48% losses in smith morra in 89 games with no recent complete booking up. now that I'm playing 5.Nf3 and no more 5.Bc4, my main line stats are 58:42 in 26 games and 62:38 against the next most common 4...d6 line. I know I could make my stats much better with study, especially in the sidelines I do poorly in for now
Hi, yeah both are fine. The chess establishment respects the Wing gambit a little more. This is very high level stuff. The Carlsbad line is just chewed up and regurgitated over and over so it's not played as often anymore.
The Smith-Morra is also positional but less so. It's more a combination of traditional attacking chess and hypermodern configurations. If feels more like there's constantly a knife on your throat. But still, it's easier to refute if you know how to get out of all the cutthroat situations. So it's considered not as good since black has an advantage right from the start.
I've been going NUTS trying to study the smith morra because move orders are driving me to a very low accuracy rate, but 2 takeaways from my last two days training are 1.when you're out of ideas, play Qe2 and 2.if black plays an early ...e5, put your queen behind your c bishop because black can't play e6. by move 6 here, white is already +3.7 and despite a few blunders on my part, my lead never dropped below 9.1 after move #12 and the vicious pressure on black and no brainer tactics are what I used to love about S&M but have missed until just recently. SOME of my book is sinking in, especially when i don't rush. or get hyper focused when I missed both 21.Qxd7# AND 21.Qf8#. I kinda like that one because it rhymes.
I'm having a hard time believing it. it LOOKS like I won my last 7 smith morra's in a row! just like when i used to kick so much butt in it, getting up to speed on the NEW theory is getting me into positions where I can just play by instinct, or recall tactical motifs. I'm really working on learning WHEN to play Qb3 besides after ...e5, and keep it as an option for any other opening
maybe I'm getting out of my smith morra blues and i'm close to 50:50 in so far it anyways. i really want to get into some of the fun crushing lines I've studied like the Nd5 gambit that ripes the e file open and lets white push his pawn all the way to d6 and doesn't even take whatever poor piece is pinned because stuff's just warming up.
In a recent video I watched, the siberian variation is recommended, but I don't remember anyone ever playing it and besides, there's that Nd5 or Nb5 line that sidesteps the trap EVERY smith morra player should know.
another ...e5 victim.... THIS is my new sicilian thrill line... FOR NOW
I like the open files, pressure on black, SWEET mobility and counter attacks waiting at every turn. I might eventually stop stressing everything but 1...e5 2.f4 as I'm starting to get the sicilian, alapin french and mieses carokann. scandinavian players are really hard to beat with the blackmar diemer, even the gedult variation i do better with.
why is smith morra gambit better than wing gambit
Apr 28, 2023
0
#15
1983B-Boy wrote:
another ...e5 victim.... THIS is my new sicilian thrill line... FOR NOW
I like the open files, pressure on black, SWEET mobility and counter attacks waiting at every turn. I might eventually stop stressing everything but 1...e5 2.f4 as I'm starting to get the sicilian, alapin french and mieses carokann. scandinavian players are really hard to beat with the blackmar diemer, even the gedult variation i do better with.
As soon as I see black playing e5 when they aren't ready, I have a huge grin in my face, because that signals my opponent is clueless and now is my prey until the game ends.
Q: why is smith morra gambit better than wing gambit?
I tried playing the wing gambit and did HORRIBLY in it.... 25% win rate, IF THAT. it didn't help that half of my tiny opening book wasn't even wing gambit theory. after I memorized about 50 lines of smith morra the HARD WAY with hand written theory trees, a couple sheets of paper to hide the moves I'm trying to guess and then later by entering every line as an individual game i could quickly skip through with my chess browser.
the very first opponent I tried to play quit on the spot as soon as I played d4! HAHAHAHA! after that, I did AWESOME using the old school mostly Qe2/Rd1/Rc1 formation and waiting for tactical opportunities, AMAZED that I always had pieces ready to pounce on ANYTHING like I'm generally unable to do developing in the opening and grasping positional voodoo magic.
I IMMEDIATELY started kicking almost every butt I played and was only beaten by one or two lower rated players while claiming +300 scalps. starting with the rating from my first game, I calculated my smith morra rating after something like 50-70 games, and it was a whopping 250 points or more higher than my actual rating.
THAT's why I defend the smith morra religiously. just yesterday, it served me SO WELL i played this NEARLY PERFECT game and miniatured a +140 with only 2 innacuracies!
I've also won 7 of my last 8 games ONLY playing my rating or higher. does that & this game answer your question?
the only game I lost in my last 8 after 7 wins or more in a row wasn't even a smith morra but a declined and i hate positional battles. i don't even count that one as a loss because it wasn't a smith morra
I tried playing the wing gambit, but it didn't work well and I don't think it is a good opening. I always play gambits after 1.e4e5. However, I get really good results with the Alapin, which I know is not so sharp. Smith-Mora seems complicated and the compensation not obvious. I didn't like it looking at the variations and have not tried it.
May 18, 2023
0
#18
coolguy567412 wrote:
why is smith morra gambit better than wing gambit
Wing gambit black is just better. Morra white shouldn't be worse(though not better)
May 18, 2023
0
#19
the wing gambit gives black a very easy game with an easy pawn up game
the smith-morra gives black a pawn up position but white tends to have counterplay despite being down a pawn
These aware 2 Sicilian gambits 1 e4 c5 2 b4 and 1 e4 c5 2 d4