Wack Chess Openings

   I am working on a book called Wack Chess Openings. It  includes crazy looking gambits and lines that are still very playable. Here are the openings I have so far.

Traxler

Kotrc-Mieses

Albin Counter Gambit

Kings Gambit

Blackmar-Diemer Gambit

Belgrade Gambit

Rubinstien Variation

Spielmann Gambit

Calabrese Countergambit

Englund Gambit

Jaenisch Gambit

These are the openings I am including. If you have any others to suggest, please comment. Also visit my blog at www.chessforkids.wordpress.com Also you can tell me (if you want) which one you prefer. Thanks!

Rubinstein Variation of what?

I wondered the same thing. Ol' Rube has more different opening lines named after him than anyone else in the history of the game.

Also, isn't there more than one Spielmann Gambit? I was looking at one against the Alekhine recently, but I saw some line of a completely different opening (could have been the French - don't remember now) show up when I was googling the Alekhine one.

And why exactly are these openings considered Wack? I can understand the unsound ones that are playable at amateur level only being called that, like the Englund Gambit. But the King's Gambit? I'm sorry, but anything used by that many world champions is just a normal opening, and doesn't belong on this list.

Speaking of the Englund, which variation are you going to cover? I used to play the "main line" (3. ... Qe7) and the Soller variation (3. ... f6), so I'll be curious what you say about it. I did great with it against the U1600 (USCF) crowd, but gave it up when I started playing guys over 1800 regularly.

The albin countergambit should also be taken off this list. Thats my main weapon against d4 and Gm's still play it I believe.

@traxlerman Can you edit your original post to give the line?
e.g. Englund Gambit (1.d4 e5)

@timeless_thoughts What do you consider white's best response against the Albin?

I don't think the Albin should be taken off the list. I think the list should be renamed. 

Wack isn't the word the OP wants so much as crazy or wacky. 

Just because something is unusual doesn't mean it isn't sound. 

After all, I believe that Bobby Fischer used to love playing the King's Gambit. 

 well in my opinion, I'll just post a diagram

Also, heres another game I played http://www.chess.com/echess/game.html?id=29938199 I lost my intivite in this game as well

Another when white starts a premature queenside attack with a3 b4 and putting there kings bishop in the corner. That also hurts me

Interestingly, your Albin line looks very similar to line of the Alapin Sicilian or Smith-Morra Gambit Declined, where black plays d5 very early. The big difference being that in the Sicilian lines, white's e pawn gets traded for black's c pawn before the center ends up looking EXACTLY like your line above.

...actually "Whacky Chess Openings" sounds better...I'll send Ben to collect my royalties...har har

 Can you post a diagram and what should I have done? Also, I will be doing a article on the albin counter gambit soon. I did not have enough time to write my full opinion on this matter, but I will 2morrow

1. Can black play 4... Qxd4, or is it simply 5.Qxd4 exd4 6.Nb5 Bb4+ 7.Bd2 Bxd2 8.Kxd2 -- is there something better or is this = or +=/=?
2. Can black play Qxd4 one move later? i.e. 4...Bb4 5. Bd2 Qxd4
3. In the line you posted after 6...e4 I agree that black may be better, but the position is rather static and not quite what the Albin player has in mind. But really, black's position is much more free, the centralized queen, and I'd rather just learn how white should play for real against the Albin. 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e5?! 3.dxe5! must be the line, for example, that Karpov would play.

Post a diagram of what your talking about please. I have a hard time reading that stuff. If you want to play a unrated game I will be more than happy to play you. I can show you all the ins and outs of the gambit. And to your number  3 question I can post here. Is this what your talking about.

Just a note, timeless_thoughts, the second line you posted more commonly goes along the moves shown in the sideline here; because taking the knight with the rook loses the queen immediately whereas this does not.

However, White's position is still awful and Black has a decisive advantage. (For anyone who's interested, it's called the Lasker Trap and is the reason why 4.e3 is considered weak in the Albin Countergambit. Underpromotions in the opening are awesome.)

 Of course whites position is still horrible he just lost his queen.

I meant the side line I posted there, traxlerman.

The Rubinstien Variation of the Four Knights. All the Englund variations. And thank you, I will take the Kings Gambit off the list. The Spielmann gambit the one against the Alekhines Defense. The other one is by black in the Ruy Lopez 1. e4 e5 2. nf3 nc6 3. bb5 f5!?