Warning to players: The Englund Gambit

Some of you fine players may know about this, but I wish to share with you a tricky trap from the Englund Gambit.

You forgot to tack on "is utter crap" to the end of it.

1.d4 e5? 2.dxe5 Qe7 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.Bf4 Qb4+ 5.Bd2 Qxb2 6.Nc3! Bb4 7.Rb1 Qa3 8.Nd5

Advantage White!

Yes, 6.Nc3 is probably the key move there (hence the exclamation).  However, why go to the trouble of moving the bishop to f4 in the first place just to have it retreat back to d2 to survive the check?  I'd probably play 4.Nc3 right away to be honest, since there is no saving the pawn on e5 after all.  You can also maybe be greedy and force 4... d6 or 4... f6 by playing 4. Qd5, and play 5. Qb3 in response to 4... Nb4.  Black would gain some tempo if you let him play 4... f6  5. exf6 5... Nxf6, making the gambit have some merit :).  So they say a pawn is worth 3 tempi, more or less. 

I always remind myself NOT to accept gambits unless I've put the line through an engine....it may not be the *best* method, but it's definitely the easiest way not to get suckered into this kind of stuff. A lot of players (especially at my level) troll through trap books and "da most agrezive chess openingz" videos online which aren't actually 'good' but promise some *FACEPALM* victories if tried enough times. 

New strategy: AlisonHart should accept all gambits.

If by 1900 you mean 1900 chess.com Live Standard, then yes, that is possible.  (since a chess.com Live Standard 1900 might be, say, 1100 USCF.)  Otherwise, doubtful.  This is a very basic trap.

I would rather live with even material than lose outright to some crappy piece of preparation - why reward people who play this junk? Instead we say "BAD DOG! Play positionally!" 

After 1.d4 e5 and any move besides 2.dxe5, Black has been rewarded for his/her bravery - in a Queen pawn game ...e5 is usually a move that Black must work hard to get in.  It would be nice to be able to call their bluff occasionally :)

I have fallen into that line

I've had the eGambit played against me and just focus on development....or I get in trouble. So, instead of 4. Bf4 I play Bg5 and hope for black goes 4the poison pawn. And yes, I learned the hard way once w/ 4. Bf4.

But then, I play 1450 chess....not the 1755 listed if you do a hover.

I take the Englund, GCB - because I've put it in an engine! But I don't take unfamiliar gambits....it seems like begging for mischief. My major goal in life is not to die in the first few moves.....and try to grind a draw out of whatever remains.

me too...it's the cutest gambit trap imo

There are some gambits out there that really need to be accepted like the elephant gambit but a lot of them can be ignored or given back. Alekhine used to play this way even with the White pieces.

You're being intentionally daft.  I was suggesting there is not ANY relationship between Live Standard and actual strength.  It's a terrible pool for multiple reasons.

At the same time, an 1100 USCF player can also be an expert strength player who never went to tournaments and played online exclusively.