An old acquaintance of mine, Thomas Johansson, had written an extremely well-received book on the KG in 2005 (I think), called The Fascinatng King's Gambit. While the book covers the whole gamut of the gambit, he pushes the Bishop's Gambit as offering white the best chances. Thomas' personal, though rarely updated, site; his page summarizing his book. He also wrote a later book on the Réti Gambit.
A win by Johansson in the 2001 Nordic Championship (ironically, not playing the Bishop's Gambit)
A 2004 win by Short over Bacrot using the Bishop's Opening:
A 1996 win by Fedorov playing a KGD
Since I'm not familiar with the Kieseritsky variation and Fisher's treatment of this gambit as black, could you please post some example?
Thank you once more Likesforests.
But what about Fisher "having busted this opening"?
Here is the whole article:
This may have been enough for Fischer to have "busted" the King's Gambit, but not for poor mortals (like most of us). The King's Gambit is alive and kicking I am happy to inform the reader!
What the KGA and KGD acronyms are for ?
KGA is kings gambit accepted KGD is kings gambit declined
busted by bobby fischer?? im a fischer fan but to refute what you were saying, read the book by larry evens " chess catechism". there gm evans explains good details about KG and how bobby fischer dislikes it at first then uses the opening afterwards swallowing what he had spitted.
I have the feeling this is going to be a long, tedious posting and I apologize pre-emptively.
I'd like to say that I respectfully, yet totally, disagree with Singa concerning the King's Gambit. Not only has it never been even close to being refuted, it's as good an opening as any to use in competitive play. There are many reasons it's gone out of style but none of them has to do with its intrinsic value.
Fischer's self-styled "Bust" of the King's Gambit (published in the first issue of Larry Evans' edited Americam Chess Quarterly in 1961) is one of the most famous and most quoted opening analyses in history. As far as it goes, it's considered a fine piece of analysis, but it's title is a gross exaggeration. Even Fischer only tried to demonstrate that after 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3, 3... d6 was the one line that was a forced win for Black. Viktor Korchnoi (long after Fischer's Bust) went as far as to state that 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 d6 (the line Fischer analyzed) was advantageous for White. So, it's apparent that Fischer's analysis hadn't been universally accepted as a "Bust" by those who would know.
Fischer penned his article as a response to his loss to Spassky in Mar del Plata, 1960. Here's the game:
In the 1963 US Championship Fischer (as White) played a King's Gambit against Larry Evans (who published his Bust article). Fischer played 2. f4 fully realizing that Evans would accept the gambit, since Evans' credo was that all gambits were essentially wrong and should be accepted Fischer, of course, also knew that Evans knew Fischer's analysis inside-out. Why would Fischer play a line he knew was a bust?? hmmm......
Here's the game:
Andy Soltis wrote the following in Bobby Fischer Revisited (2003). You can use the above viewer to follow the text:
Fischer -Larry EvansUS ChampionshipNew York 1963-64
1 e4 e52 f4!This move created a sensation when it was played on a demonstration board at the playing site, the Henry Hudson Hotel. Fischer had lost a well-known game to Spassky's King's Gambit at Mar del Plata 1960 and later wrote an article "A Bust to the King's Gambit" for American Chess Quarterly, a magazine edited by ... Larry Evans.2 ... exf43. Bc4 Qh4+Fischer's choice of the Bishop's Gambit is unusual - but Evans reply is positively bizarre! The queen check hadn't been played at the grandmaster level since Speilmann-Levenfish, Moscow 1925. Modern players prefer 3...Nf6 and/or a quick ...d54. Kf1 d55. Nc3 Be66. Qe2 c6?!Black's policy of containment in the center only works if he keeps the house of kingside cards intact. Better was 6...Nc67. Nf3 Qe7After 7 ... Qh5 White can play 8. Nd5! with a serious edge.8. d4 Bxc49. Qxc4 g5In Fischer's "Bust" he advocated 1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf3 d6 4. d4 g5 5. Bc4 h6. Gambit fans tried to revive the opening by attacking Black's pawns with 5. h4 g4 6. Ng1 and Nge2. A similar policy would work here - 10. h4 g4 11. Ne1 Bh6 12. Nd3. But Fischer has a sharper plan.10. e5!In principle, White's develpment should warrant sacking a second pawn. But what specifically does he have after 10 ... dxe5 11. dxe5 Nd7 ?Black equalizes after 12. Ne4 Nxe5 13. Nxe5 Qxe5 14. Bd2 Qd5! as Fischer pointed out. Similarly, 11. Nxe5 Nd7 12. h4 Nxe5 13. dxe5 Qxe5 14. hxg5 Bd6 and 15 ... 0-0-0.Most likely, Fischer would have made it a real gambit - 11. Bd2! with the idea of 11... Nd7 12. Re1 Bg7 13. h4 and White has promising play.10 ... d5If the center remains closed, Black will be overwhelmed on the kingside. That means ...f6 becomes a must after this.11. Qd3 Na6Black can see that h2-h4 will hurt so he hurries to castle and prepare ...f6 and ...Nb4. After 11. ...h6 12. h4 g4 13. Ne1 he is clearly worse, and after 12. ... Bg7? 13. hxg5 hxg5 14. Rxh8+ Bxh8 15. Qh7, he's losing.12. Ne2 Nb413. Qd1 0-0-0?Again 13. ... h6 is strategically bankrupt (14. c3 Na6 15. h4 Bg7 and now 16. Qd3 g4 17. Bh2 f3 18. Ng3 followed by Nf5 with good play)But Black passed up 13. ...f6! 14. c3 Na6 15. h4 g4 and ...dxe5. White should play 15. exf6 and then 15. ... Qxf6 16. h4 g4 17. Ne5, e.g. 17. ... f3 18. Ng3 Bd6 with complex play.14. c3 Na615. h4!Now 15. ... f6 16. exf6 costs a pawn.15. ... g416. Nh2 h5?Since Black's kingside will be open to invasion now, it was time to scorch the earth with 16. ... f3 (17. gxf3 Qxh4 18. Kg1!? gxf3).17. Nxf4 Qxh4?Modern players tend to forget how well grounded in positional principles is the King's Gambit. Black's kingside is a mess (17 ... f6? 18. Ng6; 17 ... Qe8? 18. Nxh5 f5 18. Ng3) and this pawn grab smacks of frustration. But 17. ... Qd7 and ... Ne7/... Nc7 offered greater resistance.18. Kg1! Nh6?White threatened 19. Nxg4 Qe7 20. Nxh5. But Black's knight is doomed on this square since it cannot be defended for long after White plays Be3/Qd2.19. Nf1 Qe720. Nxf5Material is equal but there is nothing Black can do to stop Nfg3, Be3, Qd2, Rf1 and/or Nf6.20. ... Rg821. Nfg3 Rg622. Nf4 Rg5Or 22. ... Rg8 23. Nxd523. Be3 Nc724. Qd2 Rg825. Nfe2!White wins a piece, completing one of the most one-sided strategic routs in a King's Gambit since the 1880's.25 ... f626. exf6 Qxf627. Bxh6 Bd6 Black didn't resign until after: 28. Rf1 Qe6 29. Bf4 Rde8 30. Rh6 Bxf4 31. Qxf4 Qe7 32. Rf6 Ne6 33. Qe5 Ng5 34. Qxe7 Rxe7 35. Rf8+ Rxf8 36. Rxf8+
Is the King's Gambit dead professionally? It's true that it's not popular among professionals, but it's also true that it's perfectly playable at all levels.
Besides the Short-Bacrot and the Fedorov-Najer games I placed in an above posting, here are some more modern King Gambits played at the highest levels:
In his chess column (March 21, 1999) Robert Byrne wrote:
"There is no adventure that has got as bad a press as the venerable King's Gambit. One of its greatest protagonists, the Austrian Rudolph Spielmann, a genius of attack, wrote about his disillusionment in the 1920's piece, ''From the Sickbed of the King's Gambit.'' In the 1960's, Bobby Fischer wrote an article entitled, ''A Bust to the King's Gambit.''
But both these views have come to be thought of as, at the very least, gross exaggerations, even by those who won't try the opening themselves. No one agrees with Fischer's refutation, nor with Spielmann's complaint, but almost everyone feels uneasy about taking the white pieces. There are so many diverse defenses to the gambit that to play it with confidence, one has to be an encyclopedia on something that occurs rarely.
Aleksei Fedorov, a 26-year-old grandmaster from Belarus, ran away with the Goodricke International Open Tournament in Calcutta, India, early this month with a 9-2 score, a point and a half ahead of his nearest rivals. Here is a King's Gambit that sped him on his way. His opponent was Narayanan Neelakantan of India.
Although a vast majority of the world's top players in the 20th century have frowned upon the King's Gambit, daring players in every generation have taken it up. And not just to play for mate: positional geniuses like Richard Reti and Akiba Rubinstein used it enthusiastically to fight for control of the center."
I have the feeling this is going to be a long, tedious posting
Tedious, no. Insightful, yes.