What is better, ICBM gambit, or King gambit?
At 210 elo ppl may easily play complete trash, invalidating any "gambit theory". Simply play solid opening, gain advantage and win without having to sacrifice anything.
The King's gambit is a real opening that while dubious has no refutation, whereas the ICBM gambit is an internet meme out of the Tennison gambit. If you land the ICBM you'll win the game but if you want to play some real chess go with the King's gambit.
Both are bad, but King's Gambit less so.
Is the King's Gambit "bad"? Based on what?
Sure, it doesn't give any advantage to white, but neither does any other opening.
Also, it isn't played regularly at the top level, but that's more a fashion thing than anything else. Openings come and go, the KG will probably have a time to shine again some day.
Except for a few suspect gambits, all openings are playable below the 2500 Gm level. That said the ICBM is very close (or is..... ) one of those suspect gambits. Once Black learns the tricks and where to place their pieces, the wins stop. That happens at a moderate elo. (so if you're a beginner... somewhere up the ladder, your going to be forced to stop playing it)
&..... There is nothing wrong with the King's Gambit. People who think the reason why it's not seen at the highest levels is because Black equalizes.... WRONG! No one equalizes... that's the problem!
The King's Gambit has a very low draw ratio (about 15%) with 1-0 around 42% and 0-1 about 37%... the stats highlight... YOU are either going to win or loose playing the King's Gambit... That's generally too chaotic an opening for the modern GM who's has to be fixated on their ELO... to mortals like most of us... One can play the King's Gambit their whole chess carrier.
Depending on how experienced your opponent is, but I would say that the slightly more practical one is King's Gambit
I dont really play gambits, so I probably don't have the best opinion